Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
It is https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35787 . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/7b818b72-de75-43c1-bfb6-13f7588ca8bcn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
On Sat, 17 Jun 2023, 04:34 Dave Morris, wrote: > Maybe I'm being stupid, but I don't think the given list of generators is > complete. The inverse of a generator is also a generator, so aren't there 8 > generators, not 4? (Sorry I couldn't find the PR, to put this comment > there.) > You are right. That's for a rank 1 curve -- number of generators is twice the number of torsion points. For rank at least 2 there are infinitely many set of generators so putting a complete list into the doctest is impossible anyway, and a different approach is needed. Back in about 2007 William and I tried to come up with a deterministic and unique generating set for any elliptic curve but came to conclusion that it was not possible, though we came quite close John > On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 2:57:38 AM UTC-6 John Cremona wrote: > >> I'll review the new PR, though I probably should have seen this problem >> arising with the original one. >> >> John >> >> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 09:30, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >>> You can't reopen PRs, I think, you can certainly reopen issues. >>> >>> No need to fill in the longish PR boilerplate, just remove it and write >>> what it does, mentioning #35626 >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, 09:08 chris wuthrich, >>> wrote: >>> I replaced old tests with "random" by new ones with "random" (and forgot these two). Some other tests do check consistency. All that the function really does is converting a pari output back into a point on the elliptic curve. Therefore the test checks if pari runs without error and if the returned is a point on the curve. Checking if it is a generator modulo torsion would be checking if pari gets this right. Is that what we should do? But this discussing should happen on a pull request. I repeat my question: Do I open a new one or is the faulty initial one reopened? (Trac tickets used to be reopened, that is why I ask). Chris On Friday, 16 June 2023 at 01:39:46 UTC+1 tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: > I don't think it should be random; that has the chance of hiding > actual bugs. I think we should check that it belongs to a particular set > (specifically, the one from John's comment). > > Best, > Travis > > > On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 5:15:52 AM UTC+9 chris wuthrich wrote: > >> I agree with John. Lines 2380 and 2388 need a "random output" for >> that reason, like the other calls of that function have already. >> Is this a new pull request or is the old #35626 >> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35626 opened again for >> corrections? >> >> Chris >> >> On Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 17:49:21 UTC+1 John Cremona wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 17:06, John Cremona >>> wrote: >>> The elliptic curve failure might be a consequence of the recently merged PR #35626 about using libpari to compute ranks and generators. I'll take a look to at least see if the output you get is mathematically correct -- generators are not unique. >>> >>> I was right. This curve has rank 1 and torsion (Z/2Z)^2 so if P is >>> one generator (of infinte order) then there are 3 other, P+T for T a >>> point >>> of order 2. The one your are getting is one of these. >>> >>> So we conclude that we cannot reply on pari always returning the >>> same generator despite random seeds etc being fixed in doctests. I >>> don't >>> know why that is, but if it is the case then this (and other similar) >>> doctests will have to be written accordingly. >>> >>> John On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, 17:00 Emmanuel Charpentier, < emanuel.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading > 10.1.beta2 to 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent > failures : > -- > sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest > failed > sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long > --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed > -- > > The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem > cosmetic. The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : > charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long > --warn-long 207.1 >>>
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
Maybe I'm being stupid, but I don't think the given list of generators is complete. The inverse of a generator is also a generator, so aren't there 8 generators, not 4? (Sorry I couldn't find the PR, to put this comment there.) On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 2:57:38 AM UTC-6 John Cremona wrote: > I'll review the new PR, though I probably should have seen this problem > arising with the original one. > > John > > On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 09:30, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >> You can't reopen PRs, I think, you can certainly reopen issues. >> >> No need to fill in the longish PR boilerplate, just remove it and write >> what it does, mentioning #35626 >> >> >> >> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, 09:08 chris wuthrich, >> wrote: >> >>> I replaced old tests with "random" by new ones with "random" (and forgot >>> these two). Some other tests do check consistency. >>> >>> All that the function really does is converting a pari output back into >>> a point on the elliptic curve. Therefore the test checks if pari runs >>> without error and if the returned is a point on the curve. Checking if it >>> is a generator modulo torsion would be checking if pari gets this right. Is >>> that what we should do? >>> >>> But this discussing should happen on a pull request. I repeat my >>> question: Do I open a new one or is the faulty initial one reopened? (Trac >>> tickets used to be reopened, that is why I ask). >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> On Friday, 16 June 2023 at 01:39:46 UTC+1 tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: >>> I don't think it should be random; that has the chance of hiding actual bugs. I think we should check that it belongs to a particular set (specifically, the one from John's comment). Best, Travis On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 5:15:52 AM UTC+9 chris wuthrich wrote: > I agree with John. Lines 2380 and 2388 need a "random output" for that > reason, like the other calls of that function have already. > Is this a new pull request or is the old #35626 > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35626 opened again for > corrections? > > Chris > > On Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 17:49:21 UTC+1 John Cremona wrote: > >> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 17:06, John Cremona >> wrote: >> >>> The elliptic curve failure might be a consequence of the recently >>> merged PR #35626 about using libpari to compute ranks and generators. >>> >>> I'll take a look to at least see if the output you get is >>> mathematically correct -- generators are not unique. >>> >> >> I was right. This curve has rank 1 and torsion (Z/2Z)^2 so if P is >> one generator (of infinte order) then there are 3 other, P+T for T a >> point >> of order 2. The one your are getting is one of these. >> >> So we conclude that we cannot reply on pari always returning the same >> generator despite random seeds etc being fixed in doctests. I don't >> know >> why that is, but if it is the case then this (and other similar) >> doctests >> will have to be written accordingly. >> >> >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, 17:00 Emmanuel Charpentier, < >>> emanuel.c...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 10.1.beta2 to 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent failures : -- sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed -- The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem cosmetic. The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed Running doctests with ID 2023-06-13-17-49-08-8dac2a23. Git branch: develop Git ref: 10.1.beta0-453-g443b7549ad Running with SAGE_LOCAL='/usr/local/sage-10/local' and SAGE_VENV='/usr/local/sage-10/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11' Using --optional=debian,dot2tex,fricas,gap_jupyter,gap_packages,libsemigroups,msolve,pip,pysingular,sage,sage_spkg,singular_jupyter >>
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
I'll review the new PR, though I probably should have seen this problem arising with the original one. John On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 09:30, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > You can't reopen PRs, I think, you can certainly reopen issues. > > No need to fill in the longish PR boilerplate, just remove it and write > what it does, mentioning #35626 > > > > On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, 09:08 chris wuthrich, > wrote: > >> I replaced old tests with "random" by new ones with "random" (and forgot >> these two). Some other tests do check consistency. >> >> All that the function really does is converting a pari output back into a >> point on the elliptic curve. Therefore the test checks if pari runs without >> error and if the returned is a point on the curve. Checking if it is a >> generator modulo torsion would be checking if pari gets this right. Is that >> what we should do? >> >> But this discussing should happen on a pull request. I repeat my >> question: Do I open a new one or is the faulty initial one reopened? (Trac >> tickets used to be reopened, that is why I ask). >> >> Chris >> >> On Friday, 16 June 2023 at 01:39:46 UTC+1 tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: >> >>> I don't think it should be random; that has the chance of hiding actual >>> bugs. I think we should check that it belongs to a particular set >>> (specifically, the one from John's comment). >>> >>> Best, >>> Travis >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 5:15:52 AM UTC+9 chris wuthrich wrote: >>> I agree with John. Lines 2380 and 2388 need a "random output" for that reason, like the other calls of that function have already. Is this a new pull request or is the old #35626 https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35626 opened again for corrections? Chris On Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 17:49:21 UTC+1 John Cremona wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 17:06, John Cremona > wrote: > >> The elliptic curve failure might be a consequence of the recently >> merged PR #35626 about using libpari to compute ranks and generators. >> >> I'll take a look to at least see if the output you get is >> mathematically correct -- generators are not unique. >> > > I was right. This curve has rank 1 and torsion (Z/2Z)^2 so if P is one > generator (of infinte order) then there are 3 other, P+T for T a point of > order 2. The one your are getting is one of these. > > So we conclude that we cannot reply on pari always returning the same > generator despite random seeds etc being fixed in doctests. I don't know > why that is, but if it is the case then this (and other similar) doctests > will have to be written accordingly. > > >> >> John >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, 17:00 Emmanuel Charpentier, < >> emanuel.c...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading >>> 10.1.beta2 to 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent >>> failures : >>> -- >>> sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >>> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest >>> failed >>> sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >>> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long >>> --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed >>> -- >>> >>> The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem >>> cosmetic. The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : >>> charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long >>> --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest >>> failed >>> Running doctests with ID 2023-06-13-17-49-08-8dac2a23. Git branch: >>> develop >>> Git ref: 10.1.beta0-453-g443b7549ad Running with >>> SAGE_LOCAL='/usr/local/sage-10/local' and >>> SAGE_VENV='/usr/local/sage-10/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11' Using >>> --optional=debian,dot2tex,fricas,gap_jupyter,gap_packages,libsemigroups,msolve,pip,pysingular,sage,sage_spkg,singular_jupyter >>> Features to be detected: >>> 4ti2,benzene,bliss,buckygen,conway_polynomials,csdp,cvxopt,cvxopt,database_cremona_ellcurve,database_cremona_mini_ellcurve,database_cubic_hecke,database_jones_numfield,database_knotinfo,dvipng,fpylll,gfan,graphviz,imagemagick,ipython,jupymake,kenzo,latte_int,lrcalc_python,lrslib,mcqd,meataxe,mpmath,msolve,nauty,networkx,numpy,palp,pandoc,pdf2svg,pdftocairo,pexpect,phitigra,pillow,plantri,polytopes_db,polytopes_db_4d,pplpy,primecountpy,ptyprocess,pynormaliz,pyparsing,python
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
You can't reopen PRs, I think, you can certainly reopen issues. No need to fill in the longish PR boilerplate, just remove it and write what it does, mentioning #35626 On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, 09:08 chris wuthrich, wrote: > I replaced old tests with "random" by new ones with "random" (and forgot > these two). Some other tests do check consistency. > > All that the function really does is converting a pari output back into a > point on the elliptic curve. Therefore the test checks if pari runs without > error and if the returned is a point on the curve. Checking if it is a > generator modulo torsion would be checking if pari gets this right. Is that > what we should do? > > But this discussing should happen on a pull request. I repeat my question: > Do I open a new one or is the faulty initial one reopened? (Trac tickets > used to be reopened, that is why I ask). > > Chris > > On Friday, 16 June 2023 at 01:39:46 UTC+1 tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: > >> I don't think it should be random; that has the chance of hiding actual >> bugs. I think we should check that it belongs to a particular set >> (specifically, the one from John's comment). >> >> Best, >> Travis >> >> >> On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 5:15:52 AM UTC+9 chris wuthrich wrote: >> >>> I agree with John. Lines 2380 and 2388 need a "random output" for that >>> reason, like the other calls of that function have already. >>> Is this a new pull request or is the old #35626 >>> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35626 opened again for >>> corrections? >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> On Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 17:49:21 UTC+1 John Cremona wrote: >>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 17:06, John Cremona wrote: > The elliptic curve failure might be a consequence of the recently > merged PR #35626 about using libpari to compute ranks and generators. > > I'll take a look to at least see if the output you get is > mathematically correct -- generators are not unique. > I was right. This curve has rank 1 and torsion (Z/2Z)^2 so if P is one generator (of infinte order) then there are 3 other, P+T for T a point of order 2. The one your are getting is one of these. So we conclude that we cannot reply on pari always returning the same generator despite random seeds etc being fixed in doctests. I don't know why that is, but if it is the case then this (and other similar) doctests will have to be written accordingly. > > John > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, 17:00 Emmanuel Charpentier, < > emanuel.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading >> 10.1.beta2 to 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent >> failures : >> -- >> sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed >> sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long >> --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed >> -- >> >> The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem >> cosmetic. The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : >> charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long >> --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed >> Running doctests with ID 2023-06-13-17-49-08-8dac2a23. Git branch: >> develop >> Git ref: 10.1.beta0-453-g443b7549ad Running with >> SAGE_LOCAL='/usr/local/sage-10/local' and >> SAGE_VENV='/usr/local/sage-10/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11' Using >> --optional=debian,dot2tex,fricas,gap_jupyter,gap_packages,libsemigroups,msolve,pip,pysingular,sage,sage_spkg,singular_jupyter >> Features to be detected: >> 4ti2,benzene,bliss,buckygen,conway_polynomials,csdp,cvxopt,cvxopt,database_cremona_ellcurve,database_cremona_mini_ellcurve,database_cubic_hecke,database_jones_numfield,database_knotinfo,dvipng,fpylll,gfan,graphviz,imagemagick,ipython,jupymake,kenzo,latte_int,lrcalc_python,lrslib,mcqd,meataxe,mpmath,msolve,nauty,networkx,numpy,palp,pandoc,pdf2svg,pdftocairo,pexpect,phitigra,pillow,plantri,polytopes_db,polytopes_db_4d,pplpy,primecountpy,ptyprocess,pynormaliz,pyparsing,python_igraph,requests,rubiks,sage.combinat,sage.geometry.polyhedron,sage.graphs,sage.groups,sage.libs.gap,sage.libs.pari,sage.libs.singular,sage.misc.cython,sage.modules,sage.plot,sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.function_field,sage.rings.number_field,sage.rings.padics,sage.rings.real_double,sag
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
The original pull request was merged, so open a new one. Trac tickets were occasionally reopened but not after they were merged in a development release. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAEcArF27yYr4UUZDYCizQEjoO1bwpO0f2sheFyDvGU-2g53s0w%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
I replaced old tests with "random" by new ones with "random" (and forgot these two). Some other tests do check consistency. All that the function really does is converting a pari output back into a point on the elliptic curve. Therefore the test checks if pari runs without error and if the returned is a point on the curve. Checking if it is a generator modulo torsion would be checking if pari gets this right. Is that what we should do? But this discussing should happen on a pull request. I repeat my question: Do I open a new one or is the faulty initial one reopened? (Trac tickets used to be reopened, that is why I ask). Chris On Friday, 16 June 2023 at 01:39:46 UTC+1 tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: > I don't think it should be random; that has the chance of hiding actual > bugs. I think we should check that it belongs to a particular set > (specifically, the one from John's comment). > > Best, > Travis > > > On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 5:15:52 AM UTC+9 chris wuthrich wrote: > >> I agree with John. Lines 2380 and 2388 need a "random output" for that >> reason, like the other calls of that function have already. >> Is this a new pull request or is the old #35626 >> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35626 opened again for corrections? >> >> Chris >> >> On Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 17:49:21 UTC+1 John Cremona wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 17:06, John Cremona wrote: >>> The elliptic curve failure might be a consequence of the recently merged PR #35626 about using libpari to compute ranks and generators. I'll take a look to at least see if the output you get is mathematically correct -- generators are not unique. >>> >>> I was right. This curve has rank 1 and torsion (Z/2Z)^2 so if P is one >>> generator (of infinte order) then there are 3 other, P+T for T a point of >>> order 2. The one your are getting is one of these. >>> >>> So we conclude that we cannot reply on pari always returning the same >>> generator despite random seeds etc being fixed in doctests. I don't know >>> why that is, but if it is the case then this (and other similar) doctests >>> will have to be written accordingly. >>> >>> John On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, 17:00 Emmanuel Charpentier, < emanuel.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 10.1.beta2 > to 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent failures : > -- > sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed > sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long > --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed > -- > > The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem > cosmetic. The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : > charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long --warn-long > 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed > Running doctests with ID 2023-06-13-17-49-08-8dac2a23. Git branch: > develop > Git ref: 10.1.beta0-453-g443b7549ad Running with > SAGE_LOCAL='/usr/local/sage-10/local' and > SAGE_VENV='/usr/local/sage-10/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11' Using > --optional=debian,dot2tex,fricas,gap_jupyter,gap_packages,libsemigroups,msolve,pip,pysingular,sage,sage_spkg,singular_jupyter > > Features to be detected: > 4ti2,benzene,bliss,buckygen,conway_polynomials,csdp,cvxopt,cvxopt,database_cremona_ellcurve,database_cremona_mini_ellcurve,database_cubic_hecke,database_jones_numfield,database_knotinfo,dvipng,fpylll,gfan,graphviz,imagemagick,ipython,jupymake,kenzo,latte_int,lrcalc_python,lrslib,mcqd,meataxe,mpmath,msolve,nauty,networkx,numpy,palp,pandoc,pdf2svg,pdftocairo,pexpect,phitigra,pillow,plantri,polytopes_db,polytopes_db_4d,pplpy,primecountpy,ptyprocess,pynormaliz,pyparsing,python_igraph,requests,rubiks,sage.combinat,sage.geometry.polyhedron,sage.graphs,sage.groups,sage.libs.gap,sage.libs.pari,sage.libs.singular,sage.misc.cython,sage.modules,sage.plot,sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.function_field,sage.rings.number_field,sage.rings.padics,sage.rings.real_double,sage.rings.real_mpfr,sage.symbolic,sage_numerical_backends_coin,sagemath_doc_html,scipy,singular,sphinx,sympy,tdlib > > Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rat
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
I don't think it should be random; that has the chance of hiding actual bugs. I think we should check that it belongs to a particular set (specifically, the one from John's comment). Best, Travis On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 5:15:52 AM UTC+9 chris wuthrich wrote: > I agree with John. Lines 2380 and 2388 need a "random output" for that > reason, like the other calls of that function have already. > Is this a new pull request or is the old #35626 > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35626 opened again for corrections? > > Chris > > On Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 17:49:21 UTC+1 John Cremona wrote: > >> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 17:06, John Cremona wrote: >> >>> The elliptic curve failure might be a consequence of the recently merged >>> PR #35626 about using libpari to compute ranks and generators. >>> >>> I'll take a look to at least see if the output you get is mathematically >>> correct -- generators are not unique. >>> >> >> I was right. This curve has rank 1 and torsion (Z/2Z)^2 so if P is one >> generator (of infinte order) then there are 3 other, P+T for T a point of >> order 2. The one your are getting is one of these. >> >> So we conclude that we cannot reply on pari always returning the same >> generator despite random seeds etc being fixed in doctests. I don't know >> why that is, but if it is the case then this (and other similar) doctests >> will have to be written accordingly. >> >> >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, 17:00 Emmanuel Charpentier, >>> wrote: >>> On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 10.1.beta2 to 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent failures : -- sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed -- The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem cosmetic. The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed Running doctests with ID 2023-06-13-17-49-08-8dac2a23. Git branch: develop Git ref: 10.1.beta0-453-g443b7549ad Running with SAGE_LOCAL='/usr/local/sage-10/local' and SAGE_VENV='/usr/local/sage-10/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11' Using --optional=debian,dot2tex,fricas,gap_jupyter,gap_packages,libsemigroups,msolve,pip,pysingular,sage,sage_spkg,singular_jupyter Features to be detected: 4ti2,benzene,bliss,buckygen,conway_polynomials,csdp,cvxopt,cvxopt,database_cremona_ellcurve,database_cremona_mini_ellcurve,database_cubic_hecke,database_jones_numfield,database_knotinfo,dvipng,fpylll,gfan,graphviz,imagemagick,ipython,jupymake,kenzo,latte_int,lrcalc_python,lrslib,mcqd,meataxe,mpmath,msolve,nauty,networkx,numpy,palp,pandoc,pdf2svg,pdftocairo,pexpect,phitigra,pillow,plantri,polytopes_db,polytopes_db_4d,pplpy,primecountpy,ptyprocess,pynormaliz,pyparsing,python_igraph,requests,rubiks,sage.combinat,sage.geometry.polyhedron,sage.graphs,sage.groups,sage.libs.gap,sage.libs.pari,sage.libs.singular,sage.misc.cython,sage.modules,sage.plot,sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.function_field,sage.rings.number_field,sage.rings.padics,sage.rings.real_double,sage.rings.real_mpfr,sage.symbolic,sage_numerical_backends_coin,sagemath_doc_html,scipy,singular,sphinx,sympy,tdlib Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py ** File "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py", line 2380, in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.? Failed example: E.gens(use_database=False, algorithm="pari",pari_effort=4) Expected: [(611429153205013185025/9492121848205441 : 15118836457596902442737698070880/924793900700594415341761 : 1)] Got: [(-38749202011873484470143/306317326339867638016 : 678721624672968530804232808604865/5361142413550167706041194328064 : 1)] ** 1 item had failures: 1 of 100 in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.?
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
I agree with John. Lines 2380 and 2388 need a "random output" for that reason, like the other calls of that function have already. Is this a new pull request or is the old #35626 https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35626 opened again for corrections? Chris On Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 17:49:21 UTC+1 John Cremona wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 17:06, John Cremona wrote: > >> The elliptic curve failure might be a consequence of the recently merged >> PR #35626 about using libpari to compute ranks and generators. >> >> I'll take a look to at least see if the output you get is mathematically >> correct -- generators are not unique. >> > > I was right. This curve has rank 1 and torsion (Z/2Z)^2 so if P is one > generator (of infinte order) then there are 3 other, P+T for T a point of > order 2. The one your are getting is one of these. > > So we conclude that we cannot reply on pari always returning the same > generator despite random seeds etc being fixed in doctests. I don't know > why that is, but if it is the case then this (and other similar) doctests > will have to be written accordingly. > > >> >> John >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, 17:00 Emmanuel Charpentier, >> wrote: >> >>> On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 10.1.beta2 >>> to 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent failures : >>> -- >>> sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >>> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed >>> sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >>> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long >>> --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed >>> -- >>> >>> The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem cosmetic. >>> The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : >>> charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long --warn-long >>> 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed >>> Running doctests with ID 2023-06-13-17-49-08-8dac2a23. Git branch: develop >>> Git ref: 10.1.beta0-453-g443b7549ad Running with >>> SAGE_LOCAL='/usr/local/sage-10/local' and >>> SAGE_VENV='/usr/local/sage-10/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11' Using >>> --optional=debian,dot2tex,fricas,gap_jupyter,gap_packages,libsemigroups,msolve,pip,pysingular,sage,sage_spkg,singular_jupyter >>> >>> Features to be detected: >>> 4ti2,benzene,bliss,buckygen,conway_polynomials,csdp,cvxopt,cvxopt,database_cremona_ellcurve,database_cremona_mini_ellcurve,database_cubic_hecke,database_jones_numfield,database_knotinfo,dvipng,fpylll,gfan,graphviz,imagemagick,ipython,jupymake,kenzo,latte_int,lrcalc_python,lrslib,mcqd,meataxe,mpmath,msolve,nauty,networkx,numpy,palp,pandoc,pdf2svg,pdftocairo,pexpect,phitigra,pillow,plantri,polytopes_db,polytopes_db_4d,pplpy,primecountpy,ptyprocess,pynormaliz,pyparsing,python_igraph,requests,rubiks,sage.combinat,sage.geometry.polyhedron,sage.graphs,sage.groups,sage.libs.gap,sage.libs.pari,sage.libs.singular,sage.misc.cython,sage.modules,sage.plot,sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.function_field,sage.rings.number_field,sage.rings.padics,sage.rings.real_double,sage.rings.real_mpfr,sage.symbolic,sage_numerical_backends_coin,sagemath_doc_html,scipy,singular,sphinx,sympy,tdlib >>> >>> Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >>> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py >>> ** File >>> "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py", line 2380, in >>> sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.? >>> >>> Failed example: E.gens(use_database=False, algorithm="pari",pari_effort=4) >>> Expected: [(611429153205013185025/9492121848205441 : >>> 15118836457596902442737698070880/924793900700594415341761 : 1)] Got: >>> [(-38749202011873484470143/306317326339867638016 : >>> 678721624672968530804232808604865/5361142413550167706041194328064 : 1)] >>> ** 1 >>> item had failures: 1 of 100 in >>> sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.? >>> >>> [896 tests, 1 failure, 241.41 s] >>> -- sage >>> -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >>> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >>> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed >>> -
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 17:06, John Cremona wrote: > The elliptic curve failure might be a consequence of the recently merged > PR #35626 about using libpari to compute ranks and generators. > > I'll take a look to at least see if the output you get is mathematically > correct -- generators are not unique. > I was right. This curve has rank 1 and torsion (Z/2Z)^2 so if P is one generator (of infinte order) then there are 3 other, P+T for T a point of order 2. The one your are getting is one of these. So we conclude that we cannot reply on pari always returning the same generator despite random seeds etc being fixed in doctests. I don't know why that is, but if it is the case then this (and other similar) doctests will have to be written accordingly. > > John > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, 17:00 Emmanuel Charpentier, < > emanuel.charpent...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 10.1.beta2 to >> 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent failures : >> -- >> sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed >> sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long >> --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed >> -- >> >> The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem cosmetic. >> The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : >> charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long --warn-long >> 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed >> Running doctests with ID 2023-06-13-17-49-08-8dac2a23. Git branch: develop >> Git ref: 10.1.beta0-453-g443b7549ad Running with >> SAGE_LOCAL='/usr/local/sage-10/local' and >> SAGE_VENV='/usr/local/sage-10/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11' Using >> --optional=debian,dot2tex,fricas,gap_jupyter,gap_packages,libsemigroups,msolve,pip,pysingular,sage,sage_spkg,singular_jupyter >> Features to be detected: >> 4ti2,benzene,bliss,buckygen,conway_polynomials,csdp,cvxopt,cvxopt,database_cremona_ellcurve,database_cremona_mini_ellcurve,database_cubic_hecke,database_jones_numfield,database_knotinfo,dvipng,fpylll,gfan,graphviz,imagemagick,ipython,jupymake,kenzo,latte_int,lrcalc_python,lrslib,mcqd,meataxe,mpmath,msolve,nauty,networkx,numpy,palp,pandoc,pdf2svg,pdftocairo,pexpect,phitigra,pillow,plantri,polytopes_db,polytopes_db_4d,pplpy,primecountpy,ptyprocess,pynormaliz,pyparsing,python_igraph,requests,rubiks,sage.combinat,sage.geometry.polyhedron,sage.graphs,sage.groups,sage.libs.gap,sage.libs.pari,sage.libs.singular,sage.misc.cython,sage.modules,sage.plot,sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.function_field,sage.rings.number_field,sage.rings.padics,sage.rings.real_double,sage.rings.real_mpfr,sage.symbolic,sage_numerical_backends_coin,sagemath_doc_html,scipy,singular,sphinx,sympy,tdlib >> Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py >> ** File >> "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py", line 2380, in >> sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.? >> Failed example: E.gens(use_database=False, algorithm="pari",pari_effort=4) >> Expected: [(611429153205013185025/9492121848205441 : >> 15118836457596902442737698070880/924793900700594415341761 : 1)] Got: >> [(-38749202011873484470143/306317326339867638016 : >> 678721624672968530804232808604865/5361142413550167706041194328064 : 1)] >> ** 1 >> item had failures: 1 of 100 in >> sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.? >> [896 tests, 1 failure, 241.41 s] >> -- sage >> -t --long --warn-long 207.1 >> --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 >> src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed >> -- >> Total time for all tests: 251.7 seconds cpu time: 227.0 seconds cumulative >> wall time: 241.4 seconds Features detected for doctesting: >> sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.number_field >> >> HTH, >> Le dimanche 11 juin 2023 à 13:14:49 UTC+2, Volker Braun a écrit : >> >>> As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git >>> branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at >>> http://www.sagemath.or
Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
The elliptic curve failure might be a consequence of the recently merged PR #35626 about using libpari to compute ranks and generators. I'll take a look to at least see if the output you get is mathematically correct -- generators are not unique. John On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, 17:00 Emmanuel Charpentier, < emanuel.charpent...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 10.1.beta2 to > 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent failures : > -- > sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed > sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long > --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed > -- > > The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem cosmetic. > The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : > charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long --warn-long > 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed > Running doctests with ID 2023-06-13-17-49-08-8dac2a23. Git branch: develop > Git ref: 10.1.beta0-453-g443b7549ad Running with > SAGE_LOCAL='/usr/local/sage-10/local' and > SAGE_VENV='/usr/local/sage-10/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11' Using > --optional=debian,dot2tex,fricas,gap_jupyter,gap_packages,libsemigroups,msolve,pip,pysingular,sage,sage_spkg,singular_jupyter > Features to be detected: > 4ti2,benzene,bliss,buckygen,conway_polynomials,csdp,cvxopt,cvxopt,database_cremona_ellcurve,database_cremona_mini_ellcurve,database_cubic_hecke,database_jones_numfield,database_knotinfo,dvipng,fpylll,gfan,graphviz,imagemagick,ipython,jupymake,kenzo,latte_int,lrcalc_python,lrslib,mcqd,meataxe,mpmath,msolve,nauty,networkx,numpy,palp,pandoc,pdf2svg,pdftocairo,pexpect,phitigra,pillow,plantri,polytopes_db,polytopes_db_4d,pplpy,primecountpy,ptyprocess,pynormaliz,pyparsing,python_igraph,requests,rubiks,sage.combinat,sage.geometry.polyhedron,sage.graphs,sage.groups,sage.libs.gap,sage.libs.pari,sage.libs.singular,sage.misc.cython,sage.modules,sage.plot,sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.function_field,sage.rings.number_field,sage.rings.padics,sage.rings.real_double,sage.rings.real_mpfr,sage.symbolic,sage_numerical_backends_coin,sagemath_doc_html,scipy,singular,sphinx,sympy,tdlib > Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py > ** File > "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py", line 2380, in > sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.? > Failed example: E.gens(use_database=False, algorithm="pari",pari_effort=4) > Expected: [(611429153205013185025/9492121848205441 : > 15118836457596902442737698070880/924793900700594415341761 : 1)] Got: > [(-38749202011873484470143/306317326339867638016 : > 678721624672968530804232808604865/5361142413550167706041194328064 : 1)] > ** 1 > item had failures: 1 of 100 in > sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.? > [896 tests, 1 failure, 241.41 s] > -- sage > -t --long --warn-long 207.1 > --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 > src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed > -- > Total time for all tests: 251.7 seconds cpu time: 227.0 seconds cumulative > wall time: 241.4 seconds Features detected for doctesting: > sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.number_field > > HTH, > > Le dimanche 11 juin 2023 à 13:14:49 UTC+2, Volker Braun a écrit : > >> As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git >> branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at >> http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html >> >> 443b7549ad3 (tag: 10.1.beta3, github/develop) Updated SageMath version to >> 10.1.beta3 >> 464d3d20aaa gh-35738: configure: Remove stray `stdin.info` file created >> in test >> d27b19a4efc gh-35737: build/pkgs/maxima: Fix parallel build >> 202ccd7ea08 gh-35733: more uses of yield from >> aba52d4c06a gh-35731: build/pkgs/pyflakes: Remove >> 5b446283d86 gh-35723: some pep8 cleanup in rigged-configurations >> e90d6be7a5c gh-35722: cython-lint for imports in libs/ >> 9c83f604a46 gh-35721: cython-lint for imports in rings (mostly in padics) >> 5c9ee2
[sage-release] Re: Sage 10.1.beta3 released
On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 10.1.beta2 to 10.1.beta3 and rinning ptestlong gives 3 permanent failures : -- sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/coding/code_constructions.py # 1 doctest failed -- The last two have been already reported a few times, and seem cosmetic. The first one is new and seemingly *not* cosmetic : charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-10$ sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed Running doctests with ID 2023-06-13-17-49-08-8dac2a23. Git branch: develop Git ref: 10.1.beta0-453-g443b7549ad Running with SAGE_LOCAL='/usr/local/sage-10/local' and SAGE_VENV='/usr/local/sage-10/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11' Using --optional=debian,dot2tex,fricas,gap_jupyter,gap_packages,libsemigroups,msolve,pip,pysingular,sage,sage_spkg,singular_jupyter Features to be detected: 4ti2,benzene,bliss,buckygen,conway_polynomials,csdp,cvxopt,cvxopt,database_cremona_ellcurve,database_cremona_mini_ellcurve,database_cubic_hecke,database_jones_numfield,database_knotinfo,dvipng,fpylll,gfan,graphviz,imagemagick,ipython,jupymake,kenzo,latte_int,lrcalc_python,lrslib,mcqd,meataxe,mpmath,msolve,nauty,networkx,numpy,palp,pandoc,pdf2svg,pdftocairo,pexpect,phitigra,pillow,plantri,polytopes_db,polytopes_db_4d,pplpy,primecountpy,ptyprocess,pynormaliz,pyparsing,python_igraph,requests,rubiks,sage.combinat,sage.geometry.polyhedron,sage.graphs,sage.groups,sage.libs.gap,sage.libs.pari,sage.libs.singular,sage.misc.cython,sage.modules,sage.plot,sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.function_field,sage.rings.number_field,sage.rings.padics,sage.rings.real_double,sage.rings.real_mpfr,sage.symbolic,sage_numerical_backends_coin,sagemath_doc_html,scipy,singular,sphinx,sympy,tdlib Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py ** File "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py", line 2380, in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.? Failed example: E.gens(use_database=False, algorithm="pari",pari_effort=4) Expected: [(611429153205013185025/9492121848205441 : 15118836457596902442737698070880/924793900700594415341761 : 1)] Got: [(-38749202011873484470143/306317326339867638016 : 678721624672968530804232808604865/5361142413550167706041194328064 : 1)] ** 1 item had failures: 1 of 100 in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_field.? [896 tests, 1 failure, 241.41 s] -- sage -t --long --warn-long 207.1 --random-seed=291812591553963182024849035945523427319 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctest failed -- Total time for all tests: 251.7 seconds cpu time: 227.0 seconds cumulative wall time: 241.4 seconds Features detected for doctesting: sage.rings.finite_rings,sage.rings.number_field HTH, Le dimanche 11 juin 2023 à 13:14:49 UTC+2, Volker Braun a écrit : > As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git > branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at > http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html > > 443b7549ad3 (tag: 10.1.beta3, github/develop) Updated SageMath version to > 10.1.beta3 > 464d3d20aaa gh-35738: configure: Remove stray `stdin.info` file created > in test > d27b19a4efc gh-35737: build/pkgs/maxima: Fix parallel build > 202ccd7ea08 gh-35733: more uses of yield from > aba52d4c06a gh-35731: build/pkgs/pyflakes: Remove > 5b446283d86 gh-35723: some pep8 cleanup in rigged-configurations > e90d6be7a5c gh-35722: cython-lint for imports in libs/ > 9c83f604a46 gh-35721: cython-lint for imports in rings (mostly in padics) > 5c9ee290848 gh-35720: fix the linter and add more checks > 6d1cb7e3323 gh-35718: `sage.graphs`: More modularization > a2e4cab86c8 gh-35714: provide matrix_symbolic_sparse class > 41aa6c290de gh-35713: update symengine(_py) to versions 0.10.0 and 0.10.1 > acac1e60e63 gh-35712: fix pep8 E251 in rings/ > 34b4234573c gh-35711: fix all pep8 E251 in combinat > 0a929ff9da9 gh-35710: fix pep8 E251 in categories, coding, c
