Opened 5 years ago
Closed 5 years ago
#4981 closed enhancement (fixed)
[with patch, positive review] clean up polynomial_ring.py
Reported by: | burcin | Owned by: | burcin |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-3.3 |
Component: | basic arithmetic | Keywords: | |
Cc: | malb | Merged in: | |
Authors: | Reviewers: | ||
Report Upstream: | Work issues: | ||
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description
The way element classes are chosen in sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_ring.py goes very much against object oriented design, and is basically ugly. :)
Attached patch tries to clean up this file, moves the decision of element classes to the immediate parents, adds some tests, and unifies the __call__ methods. This also makes it much easier to add support for specialized polynomial classes.
Attachments (1)
Change History (8)
comment:1 Changed 5 years ago by cremona
- Summary changed from [with patch, needs review] clean up polynomial_ring.py to [with patch, with positive review] clean up polynomial_ring.py
comment:2 Changed 5 years ago by mabshoff
- Summary changed from [with patch, with positive review] clean up polynomial_ring.py to [with patch, needs work] clean up polynomial_ring.py
This patch causes the following trivial to fix doctest failure:
mabshoff@geom:/scratch/mabshoff/sage-3.3.alpha0$ ./sage -t -long devel/sage/sage/calculus/calculus.py sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/calculus/calculus.py" ********************************************************************** File "/scratch/mabshoff/sage-3.3.alpha0/devel/sage/sage/calculus/calculus.py", line 1912: sage: type(a) Expected: <type 'sage.rings.polynomial.polynomial_element.Polynomial_generic_dense'> Got: <class 'sage.rings.polynomial.polynomial_element_generic.Polynomial_generic_dense_field'> **********************************************************************
Unfortunately the following test
Trying: Integer(2)*P + Integer(2)*Q # indirect doctest###line 208:_sage_ >>> 2*P + 2*Q # indirect doctest Expecting: (x^2 - 2*x + 1, y - 3/2*a*x + 1/2*a)
in sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/jacobian_morphism.py seems to loop forever - at least I killed it after it used 22 minutes of CPU time on the new sage.math.
Cheers,
Michael
comment:3 Changed 5 years ago by burcin
- Summary changed from [with patch, needs work] clean up polynomial_ring.py to [with patch, needs review] clean up polynomial_ring.py
A new patch which fixes the doctests is attached.
comment:4 Changed 5 years ago by ncalexan
- Summary changed from [with patch, needs review] clean up polynomial_ring.py to [with patch, with positive review] clean up polynomial_ring.py
Code wise: this looks great! I heartily agree with the sentiment and implementation.
Testing wise: I tested this on sage.math and think that it works.
comment:5 Changed 5 years ago by mabshoff
- Summary changed from [with patch, with positive review] clean up polynomial_ring.py to [with patch, with positive review, needs rebase] clean up polynomial_ring.py
Unfortunately this has been broken due to other merges, probably #4965:
mabshoff@geom:/scratch/mabshoff/sage-3.3.alpha1/devel/sage$ patch -p1 < trac_4981_polynomial_ring.patch patching file sage/calculus/calculus.py patching file sage/misc/classgraph.py patching file sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_ring.py Hunk #2 succeeded at 86 with fuzz 2 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 102 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 111 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 156 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 167 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #7 succeeded at 231 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #8 succeeded at 277 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #9 succeeded at 490 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #10 FAILED at 504. Hunk #11 succeeded at 968 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #12 succeeded at 983 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #13 FAILED at 1125. 2 out of 13 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_ring.py.rej patching file sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_template.pxi Hunk #1 FAILED at 85. 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_template.pxi.rej
Please rebase for 3.3.alpha1.
Cheers,
Michael
comment:6 Changed 5 years ago by mabshoff
- Summary changed from [with patch, with positive review, needs rebase] clean up polynomial_ring.py to [with patch, positive review] clean up polynomial_ring.py
I fixed a tiny doctesting issue in the second patch:
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_quotient_ring.py" ********************************************************************** File "/scratch/mabshoff/sage-3.3.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_quotient_ring.py", line 84: sage: A.<y> = PolynomialRing(GF(2)); A Expected: Univariate Polynomial Ring in y over Finite Field of size 2 Got: Univariate Polynomial Ring in y over Finite Field of size 2 (using NTL) ********************************************************************** 1 items had failures:
Burcin explained how he fixed the hang, positive review.
Cheers,
Michael
comment:7 Changed 5 years ago by mabshoff
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
Merged polynomial_ring.py (take 4) in Sage 3.3.alpha2
Review: Patch applies cleanly to 3.2.3. All looks very sensible to me, and I trust burcin to know what he is doing, though I cannot say that I followed through all the logic. All doctests in rings/polynomial pass, so I think that this is good to go.