> So I don't think it has to do with trac #5491. It is either a problem with > Sage finite fields, or with translating between Gap finite fields and Sage > finite fields. I'll have a closer look later today and open a ticket. >
Indeed, we just don't have the ability to coerce between GF(p^a) and GF(p^(ab)) when a and b are both larger than one. For instance: sage: K.<a> = GF(9) sage: L.<b> = GF(81) sage: L(a) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TypeError Traceback (most recent call last) /Users/craigcitro/.sage/temp/sharma.local/52679/_Users_craigcitro__sage_init_sage_0.py in <module>() ----> 1 2 3 4 5 /sage/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sage/rings/finite_field_givaro.so in sage.rings.finite_field_givaro.FiniteField_givaro.__call__ (sage/rings/finite_field_givaro.cpp:4003)() 528 529 --> 530 531 532 TypeError: unable to coerce from a finite field other than the prime subfield This is hitting the exact same line that Martin did above -- see http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/2916 for details. Someone needs to just sit down and implement this ... I think the relevant ticket is http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5426. Code for this exists in the coercion branch, so I think it's mostly a question of getting that code moved over ... -cc --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---