On 13/02/2008, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > It's a theorem! (+1)
>
> +1
>
> And I was the one who originally implemented it and made it over QQ.
-- which is certainly understandable. The pity is that it should
matter so much. ANyway,
+1
from me
>
> William
>
> >
>
--
J
On 12-Feb-08, at 7:17 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Feb 12, 2008 7:00 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, David Harvey wrote:
>>> On Feb 12, 2008, at 8:32 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
Do others agree that cyclotomic_polynomial should be over ZZ?
If so,
I w
On Feb 12, 2008 7:00 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, David Harvey wrote:
> > On Feb 12, 2008, at 8:32 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
> >> Do others agree that cyclotomic_polynomial should be over ZZ? If so,
> >> I will fix it.
> >
> > Absolutely.
> >
> > david
>
>
> It's a the
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, David Harvey wrote:
> On Feb 12, 2008, at 8:32 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>> Do others agree that cyclotomic_polynomial should be over ZZ? If so,
>> I will fix it.
>
> Absolutely.
>
> david
It's a theorem! (+1)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post
On Feb 12, 2008, at 8:32 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
> Do others agree that cyclotomic_polynomial should be over ZZ? If so,
> I will fix it.
Absolutely.
david
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe
