Opened 6 years ago
Last modified 3 years ago
#17825 needs_work defect
Do not convert unsigned elements to InfinityRing
| Reported by: | dkrenn | Owned by: | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-8.0 |
| Component: | coercion | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | Merged in: | ||
| Authors: | Jeroen Demeyer | Reviewers: | Ralf Stephan |
| Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
| Branch: | u/jdemeyer/do_not_convert_unsigned_elements_to_infinityring (Commits, GitHub, GitLab) | Commit: | 93a039f8e49a24fe02a1364db84991ac6422b130 |
| Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Status badges
Description (last modified by )
sage: InfinityRing(x)
A negative finite number
sage: InfinityRing("junk")
A positive finite number
Change History (10)
comment:1 Changed 4 years ago by
- Component changed from symbolics to coercion
- Description modified (diff)
- Milestone changed from sage-6.6 to sage-8.0
- Summary changed from wrong/weird conversion from SR to InfinityRing to Do not convert unsigned elements to InfinityRing
comment:2 Changed 4 years ago by
- Branch set to u/jdemeyer/do_not_convert_unsigned_elements_to_infinityring
comment:3 Changed 4 years ago by
- Commit set to e16686dc54477a38c063b875a6ced9d25fb606a1
- Status changed from new to needs_review
comment:5 Changed 3 years ago by
Do you plan to review this ticket if I fix the conflict?
comment:6 Changed 3 years ago by
Yes. I have asked others this question in the past. Perhaps some people use the code but don't want to review it...
comment:7 Changed 3 years ago by
- Commit changed from e16686dc54477a38c063b875a6ced9d25fb606a1 to 93a039f8e49a24fe02a1364db84991ac6422b130
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:
| 93a039f | Do not convert unsigned elements to InfinityRing
|
comment:8 Changed 3 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_work to needs_review
comment:9 follow-up: ↓ 10 Changed 3 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Ralf Stephan
- Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
The sardonis patchbot has one relevant doctest fail. It appears that to determine RIF(-1,1) < oo it has to be coerced to the infinity ring but it has no sign. OTOH, RIF(-1,1) < oo is perfectly easily solvable so should not give an error.
comment:10 in reply to: ↑ 9 Changed 3 years ago by
Replying to rws:
OTOH,
RIF(-1,1) < oois perfectly easily solvable so should not give an error.
That doesn't really matter. The coercion model always coerces. And it is the coercion which fails in this case. That is not easy to fix.
New commits:
Do not convert unsigned elements to InfinityRing