Upgrade to pari 2.15.2

[vdelecroix]

PARI/GP 2.15 is out, and homebrew, gentoo, arch, debian-unstable already have the new version.

• giac does not build, see ​giac-1.9.0.15p0.log

[vdelecroix]

Indeed, according to Bill Allombert ANYARG is gone in PARI/GP 2.15.0.

[vdelecroix]

a solution

#ifdef __cplusplus
#  define ANYARG ...
#else
#  define ANYARG
#endif

[vdelecroix]

New commits:

​d3058fe	change pari version
​c9fec46	ANYARG giac patch

[vdelecroix]

For the complete log, see ​testall.log

geometry/polyhedron/backend_normaliz.py  # 1 doctest failed
geometry/polyhedron/backend_field.py  # 2 doctests failed
dynamics/arithmetic_dynamics/projective_ds.py  # 1 doctest failed
arith/misc.py  # 4 doctests failed
libs/pari/tests.py  # 2 doctests failed
doctest/forker.py  # 1 doctest failed
doctest/sources.py  # 1 doctest failed
modular/cusps_nf.py  # 1 doctest failed
modular/modform/l_series_gross_zagier.py  # 1 doctest failed
modular/modsym/p1list_nf.py  # 3 doctests failed
modular/modform_hecketriangle/hecke_triangle_group_element.py  # 1 doctest failed
interfaces/genus2reduction.py  # 15 doctests failed
plot/plot3d/index_face_set.pyx  # Timed out
modules/free_quadratic_module_integer_symmetric.py  # 6 doctests failed
lfunctions/pari.py  # 1 doctest failed
lfunctions/dokchitser.py  # 4 doctests failed
rings/qqbar.py  # 28 doctests failed
rings/function_field/function_field.py  # 1 doctest failed
rings/number_field/selmer_group.py  # 1 doctest failed
rings/number_field/class_group.py  # 3 doctests failed
rings/number_field/number_field_ideal_rel.py  # 3 doctests failed
rings/number_field/bdd_height.py  # 1 doctest failed
rings/number_field/order.py  # 1 doctest failed
rings/number_field/S_unit_solver.py  # 4 doctests failed
rings/number_field/number_field.py  # 20 doctests failed
rings/number_field/number_field_rel.py  # 2 doctests failed
rings/number_field/number_field_ideal.py  # 1 doctest failed
rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx  # 3 doctests failed
rings/number_field/galois_group.py  # 1 doctest failed
rings/finite_rings/finite_field_prime_modn.py  # 1 doctest failed
rings/finite_rings/residue_field.pyx  # 12 doctests failed
rings/polynomial/polynomial_quotient_ring.py  # 1 doctest failed
rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx  # 2 doctests failed
rings/polynomial/polynomial_number_field.pyx  # 1 doctest failed
groups/fqf_orthogonal.py  # 1 doctest failed
groups/matrix_gps/isometries.py  # 1 doctest failed
schemes/curves/affine_curve.py  # 3 doctests failed
schemes/plane_conics/con_rational_function_field.py  # 3 doctests failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/gal_reps_number_field.py  # 2 doctests failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py  # 17 doctests failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/isogeny_small_degree.py  # 1 doctest failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/gp_simon.py  # 1 doctest failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/modular_parametrization.py  # 3 doctests failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/BSD.py  # 3 doctests failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_generic.py  # 1 doctest failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/heegner.py  # 181 doctests failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_field.py  # 1 doctest failed
schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_number_field.py  # 6 doctests failed
schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/jacobian_endomorphism_utils.py  # 4 doctests failed
schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/jacobian_generic.py  # 10 doctests failed
schemes/affine/affine_morphism.py  # 1 doctest failed
quadratic_forms/binary_qf.py  # 25 doctests failed
quadratic_forms/quadratic_form__automorphisms.py  # 1 doctest failed
quadratic_forms/qfsolve.py  # 1 doctest failed
quadratic_forms/genera/genus.py  # 5 doctests failed

[arojas]

Pushed fixes for test failures caused by different choice of generators and syntax changes so we have a clear picture of the actual issues. Remaining failures:

sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/quadratic_forms/qfsolve.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/quadratic_forms/binary_qf.py  # 25 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/quadratic_forms/genera/genus.py  # 4 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/modular/modform/l_series_gross_zagier.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/plane_conics/con_rational_function_field.py  # 3 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/curves/affine_curve.py  # 3 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/heegner.py  # 181 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py  # 17 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/BSD.py  # 3 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/modular_parametrization.py  # 3 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/gp_simon.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/jacobian_generic.py  # 10 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/jacobian_endomorphism_utils.py  # 4 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/modules/free_quadratic_module_integer_symmetric.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/lfunctions/dokchitser.py  # 4 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/groups/fqf_orthogonal.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/rings/number_field/number_field.py  # 11 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx  # 2 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_number_field.pyx  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/rings/function_field/function_field.py  # 1 doctest failed

---

New commits:

​6a83955

Adjust tests for pari 2.15

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​24e9e51

Binary quadratic forms are of t_QFB type in pari 2.15

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​e9f6662

Remove qfminimize function from qfsolve.gp, it is unused and conflicts with the builtin qfminimize in gp 2.15

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​72ff826

Rename custom ellrank function as it conflicts with a native ellrank from gp 2.15

[arojas]

Upstream report for the failures in schemes.curves.affine_curve and rings.number_field.number_field:

​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=2414

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​0e44b62	Another test fix
​330e7d7	Update test in gp_simon.py

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​b1e9677

Update to 2.15.0 final

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​07020f0	Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/develop' into t/34537/34537
​da87326	Add workaround for PARI bug#2414

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​cd0cac6	Another workaround for PARI bug#2414
​9fbb886	Filter out gp warnings that break parsing output in dokchitser.py

[arojas]

Only two remaining issues that are going to need more help from experts:

sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/interfaces/genus2reduction.py  # 15 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/jacobian_generic.py  # 10 doctests failed
sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/jacobian_endomorphism_utils.py  # 4 doctests failed

These are caused by the changes in gp's genus2red output from ​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=pari.git;a=commitdiff;h=a41e4fa95925eae42830217313583efc80628763

Sage's genus2reduction.py needs to be adapted to those changes.

sage -t --long /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/sage/groups/fqf_orthogonal.py  # 1 doctest failed

This is a weird issue that involves pari and gap code. Needs further investigation.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​328f043

Fix one more test in docs

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​a019adc

Revert "Fix one more test in docs"

[arojas]

Replying to Antonio Rojas:

Upstream report for the failures in schemes.curves.affine_curve and rings.number_field.number_field:

​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=2414

The bug was fixed upstream, but we may want to keep the workaround. It's not particularly hackish and will allow to use an unpatched system pari 2.15.0

[mkoeppe]

Is this ready to go, or should we put the giac build fix on a separate ticket?

[arojas]

It's not ready, see comment:16

[mkoeppe]

That's now #34586

[vdelecroix]

Instead of using the ellQ_ellrank from Denis Simon script we should be using the ellrank from PARI/GP (available from version 2.15). Though, the latter only works over rational numbers.

[arojas]

Replying to Vincent Delecroix:

Instead of using the ellQ_ellrank from Denis Simon script we should be using the ellrank from PARI/GP (available from version 2.15). Though, the latter only works over rational numbers.

That should go in a follow-up ticket, I think. The branch is already big enough.

[vdelecroix]

Replying to Antonio Rojas:

Replying to Vincent Delecroix:

Instead of using the ellQ_ellrank from Denis Simon script we should be using the ellrank from PARI/GP (available from version 2.15). Though, the latter only works over rational numbers.

That should go in a follow-up ticket, I think. The branch is already big enough.

Sure: #34608

[vdelecroix]

I am with Bill. I will push a fix for the genus 2 reduction.

[vdelecroix]

New commits:

​7c7d626	fix call to pari genus2red
​eb7db0d	fix doc associated to genus 2 reduction

[vdelecroix]

The modifications I have done are incompatible with PARI < 2.15. I think it would be simpler to enforce PARI >= 2.15 in the next sage version.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​6b250d3

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/develop' into t/34537/public/34537

[lorenz]

Replying to Vincent Delecroix:

I think it would be simpler to enforce PARI >= 2.15 in the next sage version.

If done, this would simplify the patch at #33360, which currently chooses from two distinct implementations depending on the PARI version.

[dimpase]

Meanwhile, please see #34496 - to forbid system Pari 2.15 and newer, until we're done here.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​96efc90

Re-fix test that was moved to a different file in 9.8.beta1

[arojas]

This is almost ready, just needs someone to figure out the failure in sage/groups/fqf_orthogonal.py

[vdelecroix]

The test in fqf_orthogonal.py does not make much sense as Oq and OL are different groups.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​48ea610

fix doctest if fqf_orthogonal

[arojas]

Replying to Antonio Rojas:

This is almost ready, just needs someone to figure out the failure in sage/groups/fqf_orthogonal.py

OK, from a closer look it looks like this is just caused by a different choice of generators for the orthogonal group. Replacing

sage: assert Oq(OL.0) == Oq(OL.0.matrix())

with

sage: assert Oq(OL.1) == Oq(OL.1.matrix())

gives the same failure with pari 2.13. So, even though this looks like an actual issue, it is not a regression from the pari update, it just happened to work by chance before due to a different matrix being tested. I think we should just flag this as known bug and proceed with this.

---

New commits:

​48ea610

fix doctest if fqf_orthogonal

[vdelecroix]

I pushed a "fix" in 48ea610. I do not think there is anything deep about generators that is tested here. Otherwise this should have been documented!

[vdelecroix]

Antonio, if you don't like my last commit feel free to replace with "known bug".

[vdelecroix]

Should we enforce pari 2.15 at configure step?

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​b38f588

Require pari>=2.15, remove old bug test

[arojas]

Replying to Vincent Delecroix:

Should we enforce pari 2.15 at configure step?

Was just doing that. Since there are backwards-incompatible changes, we should

[dimpase]

see the rationale for putting #34496 into dependencies in #34496

[dimpase]

Also m4_pushdef([SAGE_PARI_MINVER],["134912"]) is not right. This is pari 2.15.0, but without a patch it won't work. So this has to be a bigger value.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. Last 10 new commits:

​8641cfe	Add workaround for PARI bug#2414
​074848c	Another workaround for PARI bug#2414
​fc53487	Filter out gp warnings that break parsing output in dokchitser.py
​6be8431	Fix one more test in docs
​281cf7b	Revert "Fix one more test in docs"
​51ea7c3	fix call to pari genus2red
​2112c7e	fix doc associated to genus 2 reduction
​04a1730	Re-fix test that was moved to a different file in 9.8.beta1
​f0365f3	fix doctest if fqf_orthogonal
​b8ef29c	Require pari>=2.15, remove old bug test

[dimpase]

I've rebased over the branch of #34496 and bumped SAGE_PARI_MIN/MAXVER accordingly.

[arojas]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

Also m4_pushdef([SAGE_PARI_MINVER],["134912"]) is not right. This is pari 2.15.0, but without a patch it won't work. So this has to be a bigger value.

Which patch? This works fine with plain 2.15.0

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​2823bff

correct minimal version of pari

[dimpase]

OK, right, I didn't pay attention. It's giac's patch, not pari's. Fixed.

[arojas]

Looks like the force push reverted part of the 9.8.beta1 rebase. The changes in sage/geometry/polyhedron/backend_normaliz.py shouldn't be there, and the pycodestyle changes from #34522 in src/sage/lfunctions/pari.py are missing.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​1e86aa2

Fix 9.8.beta1 rebase

[dimpase]

tests good on macOS with Homebrew's pari 2.15.0

[dimpase]

I suppose this needs a round of testing on GH Actions.

[dimpase]

I've started ​https://github.com/sagemath/sagetrac-mirror/actions/runs/3164081241 I see the CI has been refactored, not sure how to run more tests.

[mkoeppe]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

I've started ​https://github.com/sagemath/sagetrac-mirror/actions/runs/3164081241 I see the CI has been refactored, not sure how to run more tests.

Use ​https://github.com/sagemath/sagetrac-mirror/actions/workflows/ci-linux.yml?query=branch%3Apublic%2F34537 and push "Run workflow"

or ​https://github.com/sagemath/sagetrac-mirror/actions/workflows/ci-macos.yml?query=branch%3Apublic%2F34537 and push "Run workflow"

[dimpase]

started

​https://github.com/sagemath/sagetrac-mirror/actions/runs/3167926282

and

​https://github.com/sagemath/sagetrac-mirror/actions/runs/3167930205

By the way, with such urls as you provided, it's not sufficent to just push "Run workflow", as this widget still has "develop" as a branch to run - so the branch still had to manually selected.

[dimpase]

works on M1 mac with Homebrew, too.

[dimpase]

there were errors with many CI runs on macOS, but I think it's not because of this. LGTM

[dimpase]

I spoke too soon. While Sage tests all pass, some of giac's selftests fail

[giac-1.9.0.15p0] make  check-TESTS
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_partfrac
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_factor
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_integrate
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_geo
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] FAIL: chk_fhan2
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_cas
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan3
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] FAIL: chk_fhan4
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_xavier
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_morley_demo
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] FAIL: chk_fhan6
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_limit
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] FAIL: chk_fhan8
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan5
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan0
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_normalize
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] FAIL: chk_fhan13
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] FAIL: chk_fhan12
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan14
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan1
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan15
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] FAIL: chk_fhan11
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan17
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan16
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan20
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan19
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan21
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] FAIL: chk_fhan9
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan18
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] PASS: chk_fhan7
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] ============================================================================
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] Testsuite summary for giac 1.9.0
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] ============================================================================
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] # TOTAL: 30
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] # PASS:  22
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] # SKIP:  0
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] # XFAIL: 0
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] # FAIL:  8
[giac-1.9.0.15p0] # XPASS: 0

hopefully it's just formatting, but needs investigation

[arojas]

I'm seeing just one failure, which is a segfault

  ***   the thread stack overflows !
  current stack size: 1024000 (0.977 Mbytes)
  [hint] set 'threadsizemax' to a nonzero value in your GPRC
  *** matdet: Warning: increasing stack size to 2048000.
  ***   at top-level: matdet([-10,-7,6,-7,1,4,-1,-2,-2,-5,1,7,-6,7,-
  ***                 ^----------------------------------------------
  *** matdet: the thread stack overflows !
  current stack size: 1024000 (0.977 Mbytes)
  [hint] set 'threadsizemax' to a nonzero value in your GPRC
Error in PARI subsystem
./chk_fhan4: line 3: 21708 Segmentation fault      (core dumped) ../src/icas TP04-sol.cas > TP04.tst

caused by the garbage collection changes in ​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=pari.git;a=commitdiff;h=259f62c17c101c380cfed56d303304a13e21ec1e

[dimpase]

I see this segfault too. Does setting threadsizemax in ~/.gprc help?

[jhpalmieri]

Dima, as noted at ​https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/32785#comment:7, it is not new that giac fails its test suite, at least on OS X machines. On Intel (old version of giac and pari):

PASS: chk_partfrac
PASS: chk_fhan3
PASS: chk_factor
FAIL: chk_fhan2
PASS: chk_geo
PASS: chk_integrate
PASS: chk_fhan0
PASS: chk_cas
PASS: chk_fhan5
PASS: chk_fhan13
PASS: chk_fhan12
PASS: chk_fhan14
PASS: chk_fhan15
PASS: chk_fhan17
PASS: chk_fhan6
PASS: chk_fhan19
PASS: chk_fhan16
PASS: chk_fhan20
PASS: chk_fhan21
FAIL: chk_fhan9
PASS: chk_fhan18
PASS: chk_fhan7
PASS: chk_xavier
PASS: chk_morley_demo
PASS: chk_limit
PASS: chk_fhan11
PASS: chk_fhan8
PASS: chk_fhan4
PASS: chk_fhan1
PASS: chk_normalize

I'll try on an m2 machine later, to see what failures I get.

[dimpase]

ok, thus it is not much of a regression.

[jhpalmieri]

By the way, should #34496 really be a dependency, or is the point of this ticket to be able to bypass the problem of building with the newest pari?

[dimpase]

Replying to John Palmieri:

By the way, should #34496 really be a dependency, or is the point of this ticket to be able to bypass the problem of building with the newest pari?

#34496 added a useful tweak to spkg-configure of pari, and so we build up on it.

[jhpalmieri]

I'm not going to be able to check test suite failures with the old pari/giac on Apple M2 until Friday.

[jhpalmieri]

On Apple M2, the old pari and the old giac give these results in giac's test suite:

make  check-TESTS
PASS: chk_partfrac
PASS: chk_factor
PASS: chk_integrate
PASS: chk_geo
PASS: chk_cas
PASS: chk_limit
FAIL: chk_fhan2
PASS: chk_xavier
PASS: chk_morley_demo
PASS: chk_fhan3
PASS: chk_normalize
FAIL: chk_fhan4
FAIL: chk_fhan6
FAIL: chk_fhan8
PASS: chk_fhan5
PASS: chk_fhan0
FAIL: chk_fhan13
FAIL: chk_fhan12
PASS: chk_fhan1
PASS: chk_fhan14
PASS: chk_fhan15
FAIL: chk_fhan11
PASS: chk_fhan17
PASS: chk_fhan16
PASS: chk_fhan20
PASS: chk_fhan19
PASS: chk_fhan21
FAIL: chk_fhan9
PASS: chk_fhan18
PASS: chk_fhan7

[jhpalmieri]

Looks like the same failures that Dima saw, so not a regression. I don't think it should be an obstacle to this ticket.

[dimpase]

OK, thanks. Back to positive.

[vbraun]

The cypari testsuite fails on OSX (intel), worked before

Successfully installed cypari2-2.1.2

real    1m45.872s
user    1m35.524s
sys     0m9.197s
Copying package files from temporary location /Users/buildbot-sage/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.5/var/tmp/sage/build/cypari-2.1.2/inst to /Users/buildbot-sage/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.5
Running the test suite for cypari-2.1.2...
ulimit -s 8192; python3 -u tests/rundoctest.py
================================================================================
Testing cypari2.closure
**********************************************************************
File "/Users/buildbot-sage/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.5/lib/python3.10/site-packages/cypari2/closure.cpython-310-darwin.so", line ?, in cypari2.closure.__test__.objtoclosure (line 145)
Failed example:
    mul([1], [2])
Differences (ndiff with -expected +actual):
      Traceback (most recent call last):
    - ...
    - PariError: call_python: forbidden multiplication t_VEC (1 elts) * t_VEC (1 elts)
    +   File "/Users/buildbot-sage/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.5/lib/python3.10/doctest.py", line 1350, in __run
    +     exec(compile(example.source, filename, "single",
    +   File "<doctest cypari2.closure.__test__.objtoclosure (line 145)[18]>", line 1, in <module>
    +     mul([1], [2])
    +   File "cypari2/gen.pyx", line 4110, in cypari2.gen.Gen.__call__
    +     sig_on()
    +   File "cypari2/handle_error.pyx", line 213, in cypari2.handle_error._pari_err_handle
    +     raise PariError(errnum, pari_error_string, clone_gen_noclear(E))
    + PariError: call_python: incorrect type in qfbcomp (t_VEC)
**********************************************************************
File "/Users/buildbot-sage/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.5/lib/python3.10/site-packages/cypari2/closure.cpython-310-darwin.so", line ?, in cypari2.closure.objtoclosure
Failed example:
    mul([1], [2])
Differences (ndiff with -expected +actual):
      Traceback (most recent call last):
    - ...
    - PariError: call_python: forbidden multiplication t_VEC (1 elts) * t_VEC (1 elts)
    +   File "/Users/buildbot-sage/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.5/lib/python3.10/doctest.py", line 1350, in __run
    +     exec(compile(example.source, filename, "single",
    +   File "<doctest cypari2.closure.objtoclosure[18]>", line 1, in <module>
    +     mul([1], [2])
    +   File "cypari2/gen.pyx", line 4110, in cypari2.gen.Gen.__call__
    +     sig_on()
    +   File "cypari2/handle_error.pyx", line 213, in cypari2.handle_error._pari_err_handle
    +     raise PariError(errnum, pari_error_string, clone_gen_noclear(E))
    + PariError: call_python: incorrect type in qfbcomp (t_VEC)
**********************************************************************

[vdelecroix]

Replying to Volker Braun:

The cypari testsuite fails on OSX (intel), worked before

...

The error message indeed changed in PARI 2.15. Should that really block this ticket? Otherwise, we do have to upgrade cypari2 at the same time.

[vbraun]

The (cy)pari testsuite is generally pretty solid so I'd hate to have to permanently disable it on the buildbot

[thansen]

Here is an explanation for the cypari error: ​https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1020456#10

[dimpase]

Replying to Tobias Hansen:

Here is an explanation for the cypari error: ​https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1020456#10

report to upstream: ​https://github.com/sagemath/cypari2/issues/122

[tornaria]

I have cypari2 pass all tests on pari-2.15 using

• patch on pari: ​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=pari.git;a=commit;h=9c4bcd3f497f30f757c8eecadc9b45b33754a540 (just remove the first hunk patching the file CHANGES since it will not apply otherwise)
• patch on cypari2: ​https://github.com/sagemath/cypari2/pull/123

[dimpase]

pari 2.15.1 is out, see ​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/archives/pari-announce-22/msg00002.html

[tornaria]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

pari 2.15.1 is out, see ​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/archives/pari-announce-22/msg00002.html

Pari 2.15.1 includes the fix I cherry picked in my last comment.

The current HEAD of cypari2 already fied testsuite passes on pari 2.15, and Vincent said he will do a release soon.

It would be very nice if this can be merged for 9.8.

[arojas]

Also, giac 1.9.0.29 builds fine against 2.15 without patching.

[dimpase]

Replying to Antonio Rojas:

Also, giac 1.9.0.29 builds fine against 2.15 without patching.

do you want giac updated here, or on another ticket?

[mkoeppe]

cypari2 upgrade in #33878

[arojas]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

do you want giac updated here, or on another ticket?

I don't personally mind, was just pointing out the possibility of updating giac instead of patching. Can this go back to needs_review now?

[jhpalmieri]

The title of the ticket says that we're upgrading to 2.15.1, but the branch only goes to 2.15.0.

[dimpase]

Oh, right, I tested with Homebrew's pari, and Gentoo's pari (they are both 2.15.1), and forgot to bump this branch.

[dimpase]

OK, readly now

---

Last 10 new commits:

​c901802	Fix one more test in docs
​eea5ce7	Revert "Fix one more test in docs"
​3898bbf	fix call to pari genus2red
​42a21a1	fix doc associated to genus 2 reduction
​d656b23	Re-fix test that was moved to a different file in 9.8.beta1
​d9c283e	fix doctest if fqf_orthogonal
​29c80f6	Require pari>=2.15, remove old bug test
​9aa2be6	correct minimal version of pari
​69ff502	Fix 9.8.beta1 rebase
​364f6d1	bump version to 2.15.1

[dimpase]

rebased over 9.8.beta4

[jhpalmieri]

On OS X Intel, the basic functionality is there (i.e., Sage builds and make ptestlong works), but the test suite for pari hangs. I see this in the log file, with no changes in more than an hour:

: gp-sta
* Testing addprimes        gp-sta..TIME=    8   gp-dyn..TIME=    8   
* Testing agm              gp-sta..TIME=   65   gp-dyn..TIME=   59   
* Testing algebras         gp-sta..TIME= 1490   gp-dyn..TIME= 1481   
* Testing alggroup         gp-sta..TIME=  661   gp-dyn..TIME=  651   
* Testing alghasse         gp-sta..TIME= 2701   gp-dyn..TIME= 2523   
* Testing alglattices      gp-sta..TIME= 1153   gp-dyn..TIME= 1150   
* Testing algsplit         gp-sta..TIME=  946   gp-dyn..TIME= 1139   
* Testing analyz           gp-sta..TIME=   22   gp-dyn..TIME=   20   
* Testing apply            gp-sta..TIME=    1   gp-dyn..TIME=    1   
* Testing arith            gp-sta..TIME=    0   gp-dyn..TIME=    0   
* Testing asymp            gp-sta..TIME=  129   gp-dyn..TIME=  117   
* Testing aurifeuille      gp-sta..TIME=    1   gp-dyn..TIME=    1   
* Testing bbhnf            gp-sta..TIME=  959   gp-dyn..TIME=  918   
* Testing bern             gp-sta..TIME=13627   gp-dyn..TIME=13270   
* Testing bessel           gp-sta..TIME=  177   gp-dyn..TIME=  170   
* Testing bestappr         gp-sta..TIME=    1   gp-dyn..TIME=    1   
* Testing binomial         gp-sta..TIME=  240   gp-dyn..TIME=  243   
* Testing bit              gp-sta..TIME=    1   gp-dyn..TIME=    1   
* Testing bnf              gp-sta..TIME=31168   gp-dyn..TIME=31762   
* Testing bnfisintnorm     gp-sta..TIME=  504   gp-dyn..TIME=  506   
* Testing bnflog           

This is after running export SAGE_CHECK=yes and make pari.

[jhpalmieri]

I seem to get the same thing with the previous version of pari. I'm trying again and I will update later.

[dimpase]

perhaps upstream does not test with macOS at all, or perhaps only with old versions, and not 13.0 ?

[jhpalmieri]

Right, I get the same with the previous version of pari, so this failure should not hold up this ticket.

[jhpalmieri]

On Apple Silicon, both the old and new pari pass their test suites.

[jhpalmieri]

Many of the changes in doctests look fine to me, but I can't vouch for all of them. Can other people check them? (One example is the change in sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_field.py, although there are others. Looks plausible but I don't know the details.)

[dimpase]

John C., can you have a look ?

[cremona]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

John C., can you have a look ?

Sorry, only jut noticed this -- will do today.

[cremona]

genus2reduction: makes sense for our doctests to just have y^{2 = ... since these reductions are not unique. The most important thing is for the minimal discriminant to be correct which we do check.}

cusps_nf: OK

lfunctions/*: OK

libs/pari/tests: OK

S_unit_solver: OK

number_field/*: OK

polynomial/*: OK

QQbar: looks reasonable, would take ages to rigorously check everything

elliptic_curves/ ell_field: OK (the two fields are isomorphic) ell_generic: OK (0 is displayed differently)

ell_number_field: (1) the first simon_two_descent test in the diffs is strange as E is defined by EllipticCurve?(K, '37') where K is a number field; the resulting curve is the one with label '37a1'. Would you believe tat I had never noticed that the function parse_cremona_label() was happy both to have the curve number default to 1 (which I knew) and also the isogeny class letter code default to 'a'? Fine, it is documented, but one day I'll change that '37' to '37a1' to be less obscure. (2) the different matrices are OK since the rows/cols will be permuted if the curves in the class are sorted differently; the docstring (written by me) says "The curves in the class are sorted first by CM discriminant (then lexicographically using a-invariants)" which can lead to differences, either because the field generator changes or because the choice of minimal reduced model (and hence the a-invariants) is not deterministic. One day I'll implement the LMFDB way of sorting curves in the class.

The rest of the elliptic curves stuff is fine.

Note that we no longer need, and could deprecate, the simon_two_descent() method for curves over QQ, since the pari ellrank() function will always be better (being a C implementation with a lot of extra geatures of the same underlying theory). But this is *not* the case for that methof for curves over number fields, at present. And for a similar reason the rank() method for elliptic curves over Q (and related methods such as gens()) should definitely now have an 'algorithm=pari' option now which calls ellrank(). It's also probably true that it should be the default, for curves not in the database, as it is extremely good (=fast and good at finding generators). But not on this ticket.

I looked at mst of the files, and all the ones where I thought my expertise would be helpful. Looks good!

[dimpase]

Thanks John, I take your long review as OK.

[cremona]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

Thanks John, I take your long review as OK.

yes!

[vbraun]

There are a bunch of numerical noise issues on 32-bit:

**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/calculus/calculus.py", line 242, in sage.calculus.calculus
Failed example:
    float(z)
Expected:
    4.646783762432936
Got:
    4.646783762432935
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/calculus/calculus.py", line 772, in sage.calculus.calculus.?
Failed example:
    float(f)
Expected:
    -480.0
Got:
    -2336.0
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/calculus/calculus.py", line 784, in sage.calculus.calculus.?
Failed example:
    f.nintegrate(x,0,1)
Expected:
    (-480.0000000000001, 5.32907051820075...e-12, 21, 0)
Got:
    (-831.9999999999999, 9.237055564881304e-12, 21, 0)
**********************************************************************
2 items had failures:
   1 of 118 in sage.calculus.calculus
   2 of  15 in sage.calculus.calculus.?
    [457 tests, 3 failures, 19.44 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/calculus/wester.py", line 283, in sage.calculus.wester
Failed example:
    float(a)
Expected:
    1.1368683772...e-13
Got:
    0.0
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of 202 in sage.calculus.wester
    [201 tests, 1 failure, 2.45 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/categories/finite_coxeter_groups.py", line 705, in sage.categories.finite_coxeter_groups.FiniteCoxeterGroups.ParentMethods.permutahedron
Failed example:
    W.permutahedron()
Exception raised:
    Traceback (most recent call last):
      File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/src/sage/doctest/forker.py", line 695, in _run
        self.compile_and_execute(example, compiler, test.globs)
      File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/src/sage/doctest/forker.py", line 1093, in compile_and_execute
        exec(compiled, globs)
      File "<doctest sage.categories.finite_coxeter_groups.FiniteCoxeterGroups.ParentMethods.permutahedron[1]>", line 1, in <module>
        W.permutahedron()
      File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/src/sage/categories/finite_coxeter_groups.py", line 755, in permutahedron
        return Polyhedron(vertices=vertices, base_ring=base_ring)
      File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/src/sage/geometry/polyhedron/constructor.py", line 759, in Polyhedron
        return parent(Vrep, Hrep, convert=convert, verbose=verbose, mutable=mutable)
      File "sage/structure/parent.pyx", line 898, in sage.structure.parent.Parent.__call__
        return mor._call_with_args(x, args, kwds)
      File "sage/structure/coerce_maps.pyx", line 180, in sage.structure.coerce_maps.DefaultConvertMap_unique._call_with_args
        raise
      File "sage/structure/coerce_maps.pyx", line 175, in sage.structure.coerce_maps.DefaultConvertMap_unique._call_with_args
        return C._element_constructor(x, *args, **kwds)
      File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/src/sage/geometry/polyhedron/parent.py", line 684, in _element_constructor_
        return self.element_class(self, Vrep, Hrep, **kwds)
      File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/src/sage/geometry/polyhedron/backend_cdd_rdf.py", line 98, in __init__
        Polyhedron_cdd.__init__(self, parent, Vrep, Hrep, **kwds)
      File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/src/sage/geometry/polyhedron/base0.py", line 174, in __init__
        self._init_from_Vrepresentation(vertices, rays, lines, **kwds)
      File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/src/sage/geometry/polyhedron/backend_cdd.py", line 65, in _init_from_Vrepresentation
        s = self._run_cdd(s, '--repall', verbose=verbose)
      File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/src/sage/geometry/polyhedron/backend_cdd.py", line 172, in _run_cdd
        raise ValueError(ans.strip())
    ValueError: *Error: Numerical inconsistency is found.  Use the GMP exact arithmetic.
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of   6 in sage.categories.finite_coxeter_groups.FiniteCoxeterGroups.ParentMethods.permutahedron
    [151 tests, 1 failure, 4.74 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/dynamics/complex_dynamics/mandel_julia_helper.pyx", line 219, in sage.dynamics.complex_dynamics.mandel_julia_helper.?
Failed example:
    fast_external_ray(0,S=1,D=1)
Expected:
    [(100.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,
      0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000),
     (9.51254777713729174697578576623132297117784691109499464854806785133621315075854778426714908,
      0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000)]
Got:
    [(100.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,
      0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000),
     (9.51254777713729032775694689466896914675974929808733306327787458869355202130788654602053071,
      0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000)]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/dynamics/complex_dynamics/mandel_julia_helper.pyx", line 229, in sage.dynamics.complex_dynamics.mandel_julia_helper.?
Failed example:
    fast_external_ray(1/3,S=1,D=1)
Expected:
    [(-49.9999999999999786837179271969944238662719726562500000000000000000000000000000000000000000,
      86.6025403784438765342201804742217063903808593750000000000000000000000000000000000000000000),
     (-5.50628047023173006234970878097113901879832542655926629309001652388544528575532346900138516,
      8.64947510053972513843999918917106032664030380426885745306040284140385975750462108180377187)]
Got:
    [(-49.9999999999999786837179271969944238662719726562500000000000000000000000000000000000000000,
      86.6025403784438765342201804742217063903808593750000000000000000000000000000000000000000000),
     (-5.50628047023172980317558651097220813419960642675275525034690583138202683104446159128356526,
      8.64947510053972416699388454766038069022656677613412868926274778156654918224636699020909555)]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/dynamics/complex_dynamics/mandel_julia_helper.pyx", line 238, in sage.dynamics.complex_dynamics.mandel_julia_helper.?
Failed example:
    fast_external_ray(0.75234,S=1,D=1)
Expected:
    [(1.47021239172637052661229972727596759796142578125000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,
      -99.9891917935294287644865107722580432891845703125000000000000000000000000000000000000000000),
     (-0.352790406744857508500937144524776555433184352559852962308757189778284058275081335121601384,
      -9.98646630765023514178761177926164047797465369576787921409326037870837930920646860774032363)]
Got:
    [(1.47021239172637052661229972727596759796142578125000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,
      -99.9891917935294287644865107722580432891845703125000000000000000000000000000000000000000000),
     (-0.352790406744857531982226711825539675074733886273844201352581335945053660908669195067107961,
      -9.98646630765023371851343140849138176796542428333725755653082848714206880231557255794864137)]
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   3 of  42 in sage.dynamics.complex_dynamics.mandel_julia_helper.?
    [43 tests, 3 failures, 5.81 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/functions/log.py", line 45, in sage.functions.log.Function_exp
Failed example:
    exp(float(2.5))
Expected:
    12.182493960703473
Got:
    12.182493960703475
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/functions/log.py", line 47, in sage.functions.log.Function_exp
Failed example:
    exp(RDF('2.5'))
Expected:
    12.182493960703473
Got:
    12.182493960703475
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   2 of  41 in sage.functions.log.Function_exp
    [281 tests, 2 failures, 4.10 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/functions/trig.py", line 608, in sage.functions.trig.Function_arccos.__init__
Failed example:
    acos(complex(1,1))
Expected:
    (0.9045568943023814-1.0612750619050357j)
Got:
    (0.9045568943023815-1.0612750619050357j)
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  18 in sage.functions.trig.Function_arccos.__init__
    [261 tests, 1 failure, 2.37 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/geometry/hyperbolic_space/hyperbolic_geodesic.py", line 2384, in sage.geometry.hyperbolic_space.hyperbolic_geodesic.HyperbolicGeodesicHM._plot_vertices
Failed example:
    g._plot_vertices(5)
Expected:
    [(4.0, -4.0, 5.744562...),
     (1.363213..., -1.637073..., 2.353372...),
     (0.138568..., -0.969980..., 1.400022...),
     (-0.942533..., -1.307681..., 1.896945...),
     (-3.0, -3.0, 4.358898...)]
Got:
    [(4.0, -4.0, 5.744562646538029),
     (1.3632131724692087, -1.6370738298435317, 2.3533722353151303),
     (0.1385685838744788, -0.9699800871213657, 1.4000223647674161),
     (-0.942533854284406, -1.3076813974501604, 1.8969450977056255),
     (-3.0, -3.000000000000014, 4.35889894354068)]
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of   6 in sage.geometry.hyperbolic_space.hyperbolic_geodesic.HyperbolicGeodesicHM._plot_vertices
    [447 tests, 1 failure, 8.67 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/interacts/test_jupyter.rst", line 120, in sage.interacts.test_jupyter
Failed example:
    test(interacts.calculus.newton_method)
Expected:
    ...Interactive function <function newton_method at ...> with 7 widgets
      title: HTMLText(value='<h2>Newton method</h2>')
      f: EvalText(value='x^2 - 2', description='f', layout=Layout(max_width='81em'))
      c: IntSlider(value=6, description='Start ($x$)', max=10, min=-10)
      d: IntSlider(value=3, description='$10^{-d}$ precision', max=16, min=1)
      maxn: IntSlider(value=10, description='max iterations', max=15)
      interval: IntRangeSlider(value=(0, 6), description='Interval', max=10, min=-10)
      list_steps: Checkbox(value=False, description='List steps')
    \(\text{Precision } 2h = 0.001\)
    \({c = }1.4142141576301823\)
    \({f(c) = }1.6836416460996873 \times 10^{-06}\)
    \(6 \text{ iterations}\)
Got:
    <CSI-2K>
<CSI-2K>
\(\text{Precision } 2h = 0.0010000000000000002\)
    \({c = }1.4142141576301823\)
    \({f(c) = }1.6836416460996873 \times 10^{-06}\)
    \(6 \text{ iterations}\)
    Interactive function <function newton_method at 0xa6a181d8> with 7 widgets
      title: HTMLText(value='<h2>Newton method</h2>')
      f: EvalText(value='x^2 - 2', description='f', layout=Layout(max_width='81em'))
      c: IntSlider(value=6, description='Start ($x$)', max=10, min=-10)
      d: IntSlider(value=3, description='$10^{-d}$ precision', max=16, min=1)
      maxn: IntSlider(value=10, description='max iterations', max=15)
      interval: IntRangeSlider(value=(0, 6), description='Interval', max=10, min=-10)
      list_steps: Checkbox(value=False, description='List steps')
    \(\text{Precision } 2h = 0.0010000000000000002\)
    \({c = }1.4142141576301823\)
    \({f(c) = }1.6836416460996873 \times 10^{-06}\)
    \(6 \text{ iterations}\)
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  30 in sage.interacts.test_jupyter
    [29 tests, 1 failure, 70.30 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/matrix/matrix_double_dense.pyx", line 1624, in sage.matrix.matrix_double_dense.Matrix_double_dense.right_eigenvectors
Failed example:
    spectrum[3]  # tol 1e-13
Expected:
    (-1.0, [(1.0, -0.5, 2.0, 0.5)], 1)
Got:
    (-1.0000000000000828,
     [(1.0, -0.4999999999999238, 1.9999999999997218, 0.4999999999999161)],
     1)
Tolerance exceeded in 3 of 6:
    -0.5 vs -0.4999999999999238, tolerance 2e-13 > 1e-13
    2.0 vs 1.9999999999997218, tolerance 2e-13 > 1e-13
    0.5 vs 0.4999999999999161, tolerance 2e-13 > 1e-13
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  24 in sage.matrix.matrix_double_dense.Matrix_double_dense.right_eigenvectors
    [611 tests, 1 failure, 0.92 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/matrix/matrix_symbolic_dense.pyx", line 441, in sage.matrix.matrix_symbolic_dense.Matrix_symbolic_dense.exp
Failed example:
    exp(matrix(SR, [[1.2, 5.6], [3,4]])).change_ring(RDF)  # rel tol 1e-15
Expected:
    [ 346.5574872980695  661.7345909344504]
    [354.50067371488416  677.4247827652946]
Got:
    [346.55748729806896  661.7345909344492]
    [354.50067371488353  677.4247827652937]
Tolerance exceeded in 4 of 4:
    346.5574872980695 vs 346.55748729806896, tolerance 2e-15 > 1e-15
    661.7345909344504 vs 661.7345909344492, tolerance 2e-15 > 1e-15
    354.50067371488416 vs 354.50067371488353, tolerance 2e-15 > 1e-15
    677.4247827652946 vs 677.4247827652937, tolerance 2e-15 > 1e-15
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  17 in sage.matrix.matrix_symbolic_dense.Matrix_symbolic_dense.exp
    [224 tests, 1 failure, 5.48 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/modules/free_module_element.pyx", line 1687, in sage.modules.free_module_element.FreeModuleElement.norm
Failed example:
    v.norm(5)
Expected:
    3.077384885394063
Got:
    3.0773848853940633
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  24 in sage.modules.free_module_element.FreeModuleElement.norm
    [1081 tests, 1 failure, 5.08 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/modules/vector_real_double_dense.pyx", line 7, in sage.modules.vector_real_double_dense
Failed example:
    v
Expected:
    (1.0, 3.141592653589793, 1.414213562373095)
Got:
    (1.0, 3.141592653589793, 1.4142135623730951)
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/modules/vector_real_double_dense.pyx", line 14, in sage.modules.vector_real_double_dense
Failed example:
    v
Expected:
    (5.0, 3.141592653589793, 1.414213562373095)
Got:
    (5.0, 3.141592653589793, 1.4142135623730951)
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   2 of   8 in sage.modules.vector_real_double_dense
    [19 tests, 2 failures, 10.89 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/complex_double.pyx", line 1136, in sage.rings.complex_double.ComplexDoubleElement._latex_
Failed example:
    z._latex_()
Expected:
    '-6.443164690985956 \\times 10^{34} - 6.113241307762409 \\times 10^{34}i'
Got:
    '-6.443164690985963 \\times 10^{34} - 6.113241307762415 \\times 10^{34}i'
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/complex_double.pyx", line 1685, in sage.rings.complex_double.ComplexDoubleElement._pow_
Failed example:
    CDF(-0.26319743704743886) ^ -2
Expected:
    14.435661446561994
Got:
    14.435661446561992
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/complex_double.pyx", line 1936, in sage.rings.complex_double.ComplexDoubleElement.arccos
Failed example:
    CDF(1,1).arccos()
Expected:
    0.9045568943023814 - 1.0612750619050357*I
Got:
    0.9045568943023815 - 1.0612750619050357*I
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/complex_double.pyx", line 2115, in sage.rings.complex_double.ComplexDoubleElement.arccosh
Failed example:
    CDF(1,1).arccosh()
Expected:
    1.0612750619050357 + 0.9045568943023814*I
Got:
    1.0612750619050357 + 0.9045568943023815*I
**********************************************************************
4 items had failures:
   1 of   4 in sage.rings.complex_double.ComplexDoubleElement._latex_
   1 of  19 in sage.rings.complex_double.ComplexDoubleElement._pow_
   1 of   2 in sage.rings.complex_double.ComplexDoubleElement.arccos
   1 of   2 in sage.rings.complex_double.ComplexDoubleElement.arccosh
    [341 tests, 4 failures, 0.27 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/complex_mpc.pyx", line 1524, in sage.rings.complex_mpc.MPComplexNumber.__abs__
Failed example:
    float(sqrt(2^2 + 1^1))
Expected:
    2.23606797749979
Got:
    2.2360679774997894
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  10 in sage.rings.complex_mpc.MPComplexNumber.__abs__
    [410 tests, 1 failure, 0.21 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/complex_mpfr.pyx", line 1885, in sage.rings.complex_mpfr.ComplexNumber.__abs__
Failed example:
    float(sqrt(2^2 + 1^1))
Expected:
    2.23606797749979
Got:
    2.2360679774997894
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of   9 in sage.rings.complex_mpfr.ComplexNumber.__abs__
    [539 tests, 1 failure, 1.78 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx", line 1640, in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement.is_norm
Failed example:
    t = (-a).is_norm(L, element=True); t
Expected:
    (True, -b^3 - 1)
Got:
    (True, b^3 - 1)
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx", line 1755, in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement._rnfisnorm
Failed example:
    t = (-a)._rnfisnorm(L); t
Expected:
    (-b^3 - 1, 1)
Got:
    (b^3 - 1, 1)
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx", line 1759, in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement._rnfisnorm
Failed example:
    t = K(3)._rnfisnorm(L); t
Expected:
    (b^3 + a*b^2 + a^2*b - 1, 3*a^2 - 3*a + 6)
Got:
    (-b^3 + a*b^2 - a^2*b - 1, 3*a^2 - 3*a + 6)
**********************************************************************
2 items had failures:
   2 of  27 in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement._rnfisnorm
   1 of  28 in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement.is_norm
    [1168 tests, 3 failures, 14.02 s]
doctest:warning
  File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.8/lib/python3.10/threading.py", line 973, in _bootstrap
    self._bootstrap_inner()
  File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.8/lib/python3.10/threading.py", line 1002, in _bootstrap_inner
    self._set_tstate_lock()
  File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.8/lib/python3.10/threading.py", line 991, in _set_tstate_lock
    self._tstate_lock = _set_sentinel()
  File "/var/lib/buildbot/worker/sage_git/build/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.10.8/lib/python3.10/warnings.py", line 109, in _showwarnmsg
    sw(msg.message, msg.category, msg.filename, msg.lineno,
:
RuntimeWarning: cypari2 leaked 4032445012 bytes on the PARI stack
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 154, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl._pow_int
Failed example:
    base._pow_int(2^57)
Expected:
    78962960182680.42
Got:
    78962960182680.27
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 156, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl._pow_int
Failed example:
    base._pow_int(2^57 + 1)
Expected:
    78962960182680.42
Got:
    78962960182680.27
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 170, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl._pow_int
Failed example:
    base._pow_int(2^57)
Expected:
    78962960182680.42
Got:
    78962960182680.27
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 172, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl._pow_int
Failed example:
    base._pow_int(2^57 + 1)
Expected:
    -78962960182680.42
Got:
    -78962960182680.27
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 195, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl._pow_long
Failed example:
    base ^ (2^57)
Expected:
    78962960182680.42
Got:
    78962960182680.27
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 197, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl._pow_long
Failed example:
    base ^ RDF(2^57)
Expected:
    78962960182680.42
Got:
    78962960182680.27
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 384, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.exp
Failed example:
    a = r.exp(); a
Expected:
    106588847274864.47
Got:
    106588847274864.22
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 392, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.exp
Failed example:
    r.exp()
Expected:
    9.381844588498685e-15
Got:
    9.381844588498707e-15
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 418, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.exp2
Failed example:
    r.exp2()
Expected:
    4294967295.9999967
Got:
    4294967296.0
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 424, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.exp2
Failed example:
    r.exp2()
Expected:
    1.8911724825302065e-10
Got:
    1.8911724825302072e-10
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 445, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.exp10
Failed example:
    r.exp10()
Expected:
    1.0000000000000069e+32
Got:
    1.0000000000000062e+32
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 451, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.exp10
Failed example:
    r.exp10()
Expected:
    5.011872336272702e-33
Got:
    5.011872336272695e-33
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 651, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.acosh
Failed example:
    i = q.cosh(); i
Expected:
    2.5091784786580567
Got:
    2.509178478658056
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 665, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.arcsinh
Failed example:
    i = q.sinh(); i
Expected:
    2.3012989023072947
Got:
    2.3012989023072943
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 679, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.arctanh
Failed example:
    i = q.tanh(); i
Expected:
    0.9171523356672744
Got:
    0.9171523356672743
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 681, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.arctanh
Failed example:
    i.arctanh() - q  # rel tol 1
Expected:
    4.440892098500626e-16
Got:
    -4.440892098500626e-16
Tolerance exceeded:
    4.440892098500626e-16 vs -4.440892098500626e-16, tolerance 3e0 > 1e0
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 692, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.sech
Failed example:
    RDF(pi).sech()
Expected:
    0.08626673833405443
Got:
    0.08626673833405446
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 694, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.sech
Failed example:
    CDF(pi).sech()
Expected:
    0.08626673833405443
Got:
    0.08626673833405446
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx", line 705, in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.csch
Failed example:
    RDF(pi).csch()
Expected:
    0.08658953753004694
Got:
    0.08658953753004697
**********************************************************************
10 items had failures:
   4 of  23 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl._pow_int
   2 of   8 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl._pow_long
   1 of   4 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.acosh
   1 of   4 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.arcsinh
   2 of   4 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.arctanh
   1 of   3 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.csch
   2 of   9 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.exp
   2 of   7 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.exp10
   2 of   7 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.exp2
   2 of   3 in sage.rings.real_double_element_gsl.RealDoubleElement_gsl.sech
    [145 tests, 19 failures, 0.06 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/stats/hmm/hmm.pyx", line 596, in sage.stats.hmm.hmm.DiscreteHiddenMarkovModel._forward_scale
Failed example:
    m._forward_scale(stats.IntList([0,1]*10))
Expected:
    -14.378663512219454
Got:
    -14.378663512219456
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/stats/hmm/hmm.pyx", line 601, in sage.stats.hmm.hmm.DiscreteHiddenMarkovModel._forward_scale
Failed example:
    m.log_likelihood(stats.IntList([0,1]*10))
Expected:
    -14.378663512219454
Got:
    -14.378663512219456
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   2 of   8 in sage.stats.hmm.hmm.DiscreteHiddenMarkovModel._forward_scale
    [121 tests, 2 failures, 0.67 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/structure/element.pyx", line 2016, in sage.structure.element.Element.__pow__
Failed example:
    complex(1,2)**(1/2)
Expected:
    (1.272019649514069+0.786151377757423...j)
Got:
    (1.2720196495140692+0.7861513777574234j)
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  24 in sage.structure.element.Element.__pow__
    [756 tests, 1 failure, 12.71 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx", line 1659, in sage.symbolic.expression.Expression._convert
Failed example:
    f._convert({'parent':RDF})
Expected:
    -1.40006081533995
Got:
    -1.4000608153399503
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx", line 7581, in sage.symbolic.expression.Expression.polynomial
Failed example:
    f.polynomial(CDF)   # abs tol 5e-16
Expected:
    54.598150033144236*x^4 - 20.085536923187668*I*x^3 - 7.38905609893065*x^2 + 2.718281828459045*I*x + 1.0
Got:
    54.598150033144236*x^4 - 20.08553692318767*I*x^3 - 7.38905609893065*x^2 + 2.718281828459045*I*x + 1.0
Tolerance exceeded in 1 of 8:
    - 20.085536923187668 vs - 20.08553692318767, tolerance 3e-15 > 5e-16
**********************************************************************
2 items had failures:
   1 of  18 in sage.symbolic.expression.Expression._convert
   1 of  31 in sage.symbolic.expression.Expression.polynomial
    [3077 tests, 2 failures, 38.85 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage_setup/autogen/interpreters/specs/cdf.py", line 57, in sage_setup.autogen.interpreters.specs.cdf.CDFInterpreter.__init__
Failed example:
    f(CDF(1+2j))  # rel tol 4e-16
Expected:
    -10391778.999999996 + 3349659.499999962*I
Got:
    -10391779.000000013 + 3349659.4999999646*I
Tolerance exceeded in 2 of 2:
    -10391778.999999996 vs -10391779.000000013, tolerance 2e-15 > 4e-16
    + 3349659.499999962 vs + 3349659.4999999646, tolerance 8e-16 > 4e-16
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  20 in sage_setup.autogen.interpreters.specs.cdf.CDFInterpreter.__init__
    [19 tests, 1 failure, 0.08 s]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/calculus/calculus.py  # 3 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/calculus/wester.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/categories/finite_coxeter_groups.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/dynamics/complex_dynamics/mandel_julia_helper.pyx  # 3 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/functions/log.py  # 2 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/functions/trig.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/geometry/hyperbolic_space/hyperbolic_geodesic.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/interacts/test_jupyter.rst  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/matrix/matrix_double_dense.pyx  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/matrix/matrix_symbolic_dense.pyx  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/modules/free_module_element.pyx  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/modules/vector_real_double_dense.pyx  # 2 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/rings/complex_double.pyx  # 4 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/rings/complex_mpc.pyx  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/rings/complex_mpfr.pyx  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx  # 3 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/rings/real_double_element_gsl.pyx  # 19 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/stats/hmm/hmm.pyx  # 2 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/structure/element.pyx  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx  # 2 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage_setup/autogen/interpreters/specs/cdf.py  # 1 doctest failed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total time for all tests: 7092.1 seconds
    cpu time: 12138.2 seconds
    cumulative wall time: 12442.3 seconds

Full log: ​http://build.sagemath.org/#/builders/47/builds/14/steps/14/logs/stdio

[vdelecroix]

Many of these numerical noises do not involve PARI/GP at all!

[dimpase]

Indeed, e.g.

File "src/sage/calculus/calculus.py", line 772, in sage.calculus.calculus.?
Failed example:
    float(f)
Expected:
    -480.0
Got:
    -2336.0

and ensuing error in this file have nothing to do with Pari. Are we still supporting 32-bit seriously? Indeed, these 32-bit errors should have been caught elsewhere.

I wonder whether Pari 2.15.1 passes its selftests on 32-bit, too.

[tornaria]

Fix: ​https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/master/srcpkgs/pari/patches/float32.patch

All tests pass on void linux i686 (using that patch on pari).

[tornaria]

BTW, I've just submitted a report upstream to the pari bug tracker, which I had neglected to do before.

[vbraun]

Replying to Vincent Delecroix:

Many of these numerical noises do not involve PARI/GP at all!

tests run fine without this ticket tho...

[dimpase]

Replying to Volker Braun:

Replying to Vincent Delecroix:

Many of these numerical noises do not involve PARI/GP at all!

tests run fine without this ticket tho...

The offending Pari commit, reverted by Gonzalo's patch, is not in 2.13.3, but is in 2.15.1. Maybe it flips FPU switches somewhere...

[tornaria]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

Replying to Volker Braun:

Replying to Vincent Delecroix:

Many of these numerical noises do not involve PARI/GP at all!

tests run fine without this ticket tho...

The offending Pari commit, reverted by Gonzalo's patch, is not in 2.13.3, but is in 2.15.1. Maybe it flips FPU switches somewhere...

Precisely. The 387 fpu has a switch to choose between 64-bit (double) and 80-bit (long double) arithmetic. The problem is that transcendental functions depend on 80 bit arithmetic to give accurate 64 bit results 🤦‍♂️

Just linking to pari (without even initializing it) will affect a program, as demonstrated in the test program in my commit message (​https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/master/srcpkgs/pari/patches/float32.patch).

Maybe it is possible to override the -mpc64 setting in pari library by explicitly adding -mpc80 to the linking step of sage. Or adding code in sage init to explicitly initialize the FPU to a safe mode.

Be warned that removing the -mpc64 flag in pari might result in some numerical differences on pari itself due to 80 bit precission. In void linux we compile pari with -ffloat-store which avoids this issue.

[tornaria]

​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=2435

[dimpase]

should we proceed with the Gonzalo's patch ?

the upstream is clearly wrong in applying this change unconditionally, IMHO

[dimpase]

Upstream provided a fix on ​​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=2435, let's test it.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​847cc1a

try out 32-bit fix from upstream

[dimpase]

32-bit-capable, please try this out

[cremona]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

32-bit-capable, please try this out

I found an old laptop, last seriously used in 2008, it has ubuntu 10.04 installed (!) and a working Sage 4.7. Must be 32-bit. I wonder how much work it would be to get it into a state in which I could try building a new Sage (for testing things like this)?

[dimpase]

probably ubuntu 10 is way too old even for stand alone Pari - but you can try (building/testing Pari 2.15)

[cremona]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

probably ubuntu 10 is way too old even for stand alone Pari - but you can try (building/testing Pari 2.15)

Sorry, it kept on crashing when I tried to install anything. I'm not sure it's worth it.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. Last 10 new commits:

​ce306b2	Revert "Fix one more test in docs"
​a795cf1	fix call to pari genus2red
​66d09f6	fix doc associated to genus 2 reduction
​c974999	Re-fix test that was moved to a different file in 9.8.beta1
​9d2dcd4	fix doctest if fqf_orthogonal
​0cb6ba9	Require pari>=2.15, remove old bug test
​72d8024	correct minimal version of pari
​21851db	Fix 9.8.beta1 rebase
​0bfcb1e	bump version to 2.15.1
​e3e74ef	try out 32-bit fix from upstream

[dimpase]

rebased over the latest beta

[mkoeppe]

debian-buster-i386-minimal (​https://github.com/mkoeppe/sage/actions/runs/3813720548/jobs/6501916887):

sage -t --random-seed=304199016987563679993262730039611175926 src/sage/parallel/decorate.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --random-seed=304199016987563679993262730039611175926 src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx  # 3 doctests failed
sage -t --random-seed=304199016987563679993262730039611175926 src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_ideal_rel.py  # 1 doctest failed
sage -t --random-seed=304199016987563679993262730039611175926 src/sage/rings/qqbar.py  # 7 doctests failed

[dimpase]

these seem to be different failures than these from the previous try. This one is a red herring, I think.

2023-01-02T17:09:28.9130459Z File "src/sage/parallel/decorate.py", line 560, in sage.parallel.decorate.fork
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9130748Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9131128Z     print("this works"); g()                                      # optional - sage.misc.cython
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9131402Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9131605Z     this works...
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9131801Z     <BLANKLINE>
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9132181Z     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9132477Z     Unhandled SIG...
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9132841Z     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9133153Z     'NO DATA'
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9133348Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9133525Z     this works
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9133893Z     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
2023-01-02T17:09:28.9134535Z     /sage/local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.11.1/lib/python3.11/site-packages/cysignals/signals.cpython-311-i386-linux-gnu.so(+0x5bb2)[0xf6365bb2]
...

but the rest look as if something has changed with signs handling somewhere in Pari

2023-01-02T17:17:20.0394427Z sage -t --random-seed=304199016987563679993262730039611175926 src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0394753Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0395167Z File "src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx", line 1640, in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement.is_norm
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0395544Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0395830Z     t = (-a).is_norm(L, element=True); t
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0396038Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0396266Z     (True, -b^3 - 1)
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0396463Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0396660Z     (True, b^3 - 1)
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0396885Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0397311Z File "src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx", line 1755, in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement._rnfisnorm
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0397686Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0397930Z     t = (-a)._rnfisnorm(L); t
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0398136Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0398350Z     (-b^3 - 1, 1)
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0398518Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0398724Z     (b^3 - 1, 1)
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0398951Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0399351Z File "src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx", line 1759, in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement._rnfisnorm
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0399721Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0399929Z     t = K(3)._rnfisnorm(L); t
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0400120Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0400394Z     (b^3 + a*b^2 + a^2*b - 1, 3*a^2 - 3*a + 6)
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0400605Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0400854Z     (-b^3 + a*b^2 - a^2*b - 1, 3*a^2 - 3*a + 6)
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0401102Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0401331Z 2 items had failures:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0401638Z    2 of  27 in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement._rnfisnorm
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0402059Z    1 of  28 in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element.NumberFieldElement.is_norm
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0402383Z     [1167 tests, 3 failures, 20.14 s]

again something with the norm of algebraic numbers:

2023-01-02T17:17:20.0407122Z File "src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_ideal_rel.py", line 221, in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_ideal_rel.NumberFieldFractionalIdeal_rel._from_absolute_ideal
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0407519Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0407730Z     J.absolute_ideal()
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0407934Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0408389Z     Fractional ideal (22584817, -1473/812911*a^5 + 8695/4877466*a^4 - 1308209/4877466*a^3 + 117415/443406*a^2 - 22963264/2438733*a - 13721081784272/2438733)
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0408653Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0409104Z     Fractional ideal (22584817, -4417/2438733*a^5 - 2867/1625822*a^4 - 1307249/4877466*a^3 - 112151/443406*a^2 - 22904674/2438733*a - 13720435234111/2438733)
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0409412Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0409620Z 1 item had failures:
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0409977Z    1 of   9 in sage.rings.number_field.number_field_ideal_rel.NumberFieldFractionalIdeal_rel._from_absolute_ideal
2023-01-02T17:17:20.0410331Z     [233 tests, 1 failure, 1.43 s]

no idea about these:

2023-01-02T17:21:09.2828507Z sage -t --random-seed=304199016987563679993262730039611175926 src/sage/rings/qqbar.py
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2828799Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2829146Z File "src/sage/rings/qqbar.py", line 2659, in sage.rings.qqbar.number_field_elements_from_algebraics
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2829457Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2829646Z     nf
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2829813Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2830162Z     Number Field in a with defining polynomial y^24 - 6*y^23 ...- 9*y^2 + 1
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2830444Z       with a = 0.2598679? + 0.0572892?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2830630Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2831197Z     Number Field in a with defining polynomial y^24 - 9*y^22 + 135*y^20 - 720*y^18 + 1821*y^16 - 3015*y^14 + 3974*y^12 - 3015*y^10 + 1821*y^8 - 720*y^6 + 135*y^4 - 9*y^2 + 1 with a = -0.2368370943? - 0.2078201084?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2831560Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2831903Z File "src/sage/rings/qqbar.py", line 7860, in sage.rings.qqbar.ANExtensionElement.neg
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2832200Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2832395Z     b.neg(a)
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2832582Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2832974Z     -1/3*a^3 + 1/3*a^2 - a - 1 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 + 6*a + 3 = 0 and a in 1.724744871391589? + 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2833232Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2833631Z     1/3*a^3 - 2/3*a^2 + 4/3*a - 2 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 - 6*a + 9 = 0 and a in -0.7247448713915890? - 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2833921Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2834264Z File "src/sage/rings/qqbar.py", line 7862, in sage.rings.qqbar.ANExtensionElement.neg
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2834937Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2835139Z     b.neg("ham spam and eggs")
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2835348Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2835750Z     -1/3*a^3 + 1/3*a^2 - a - 1 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 + 6*a + 3 = 0 and a in 1.724744871391589? + 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2836007Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2836389Z     1/3*a^3 - 2/3*a^2 + 4/3*a - 2 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 - 6*a + 9 = 0 and a in -0.7247448713915890? - 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2836797Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2837156Z File "src/sage/rings/qqbar.py", line 7878, in sage.rings.qqbar.ANExtensionElement.invert
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2837461Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2837663Z     b.invert(a)
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2837853Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2838246Z     -7/3*a^3 + 19/3*a^2 - 7*a - 9 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 + 6*a + 3 = 0 and a in 1.724744871391589? + 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2838506Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2838904Z     7/3*a^3 - 2/3*a^2 + 4/3*a - 12 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 - 6*a + 9 = 0 and a in -0.7247448713915890? - 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2839200Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2839543Z File "src/sage/rings/qqbar.py", line 7880, in sage.rings.qqbar.ANExtensionElement.invert
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2839859Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2840082Z     b.invert("ham spam and eggs")
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2840282Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2840681Z     -7/3*a^3 + 19/3*a^2 - 7*a - 9 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 + 6*a + 3 = 0 and a in 1.724744871391589? + 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2840934Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2841314Z     7/3*a^3 - 2/3*a^2 + 4/3*a - 12 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 - 6*a + 9 = 0 and a in -0.7247448713915890? - 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2841607Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2841966Z File "src/sage/rings/qqbar.py", line 7896, in sage.rings.qqbar.ANExtensionElement.conjugate
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2842292Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2842477Z     b.conjugate(a)
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2842672Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2843064Z     1/3*a^3 - 1/3*a^2 + a + 1 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 + 6*a + 3 = 0 and a in 1.724744871391589? - 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2843299Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2843696Z     -1/3*a^3 + 2/3*a^2 - 4/3*a + 2 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 - 6*a + 9 = 0 and a in -0.7247448713915890? + 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:09.2843990Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:21:27.9889948Z File "src/sage/rings/qqbar.py", line 7898, in sage.rings.qqbar.ANExtensionElement.conjugate
2023-01-02T17:21:27.9890654Z Failed example:
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0009431Z     b.conjugate("ham spam and eggs")
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0009680Z Expected:
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0010307Z     1/3*a^3 - 1/3*a^2 + a + 1 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 + 6*a + 3 = 0 and a in 1.724744871391589? - 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0010587Z Got:
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0010978Z     -1/3*a^3 + 2/3*a^2 - 4/3*a + 2 where a^4 - 2*a^3 + a^2 - 6*a + 9 = 0 and a in -0.7247448713915890? + 1.573132184970987?*I
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0011281Z **********************************************************************
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0011508Z 4 items had failures:
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0011797Z    2 of   7 in sage.rings.qqbar.ANExtensionElement.conjugate
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0012179Z    2 of   7 in sage.rings.qqbar.ANExtensionElement.invert
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0012532Z    2 of   7 in sage.rings.qqbar.ANExtensionElement.neg
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0012881Z    1 of  60 in sage.rings.qqbar.number_field_elements_from_algebraics
2023-01-02T17:21:28.0013161Z     [1629 tests, 7 failures, 31.12 s]

[cremona]

I will check the number field norms diffs (which are probably fine, the solution to Norm(x)=y is not unique, and if the relaive degree is even then Norm(-1)=1 so Norm(-x)=Norm(x)).

I'll also ook at the QQbar ones.

[cremona]

src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx: OK

src/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_ideal_rel.py: it is a bad test. The abolute ideal is an ideal in (the ring of integers of) the absolue field, whose generators are xepressed in terms of a generator of that field, whose name is displayed as 'a' as no names= paramater was given, but a has another meaning and this is confusing. Also the absolute field does not have a unique generator. I think it is simplest not to test how the abolute ideal looks at all.

QQbar next...

[cremona]

src/sage/rings/qqbar.py:

l.2659: I would not display the nf at all, the generator is not unique and each generator has 24 complex embeddings. Or you could put

sage: nf.is_isomorphic(NumberField(x^24 + 27*x^22 + 291*x^20 + 1548*x^18 + 4893*x^16 + 9657*x^14 + 12110*x^12 + 9657*x^10 + 4893*x^8 + 1548*x^6 + 291*
....: x^4 + 27*x^2 + 1,'b'))
True

l.7860: a terrible test of a weird function. The method neg() takes a parameter n which is not used (but is not optional), in the test a is used for the parameter (confusing), and -- worse -- the a which appears in the putput has nothing to do with the identifier a, it is a name chosen internally for some generator.

I think these three methods (neg, invert, conjugate) need attention. The docstring for conjugate() wrongly says it returns the negation, a cut-and-paste error.

Years ago I spent a while improving the doctests in this >8000-line file but gave up after doing quite a lot!

I am willing to make a branch fixing all these except the first one (src/sage/parallel/decorate.py). Should I base that on u/dimpase/packages/pari2151 ?

[dimpase]

Thanks for stepping in, John. Apparently Pari itself has not been changed in ​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=2435 - besides dropping the questionable compiler switch.

Yes, please base your branch (much appreciated!) on the ticket branch.

[cremona]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

Thanks for stepping in, John. Apparently Pari itself has not been changed in ​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=2435 - besides dropping the questionable compiler switch.

Yes, please base your branch (much appreciated!) on the ticket branch.

OK, building now...

[cremona]

@dimpase, to avoid these errors:

make --no-print-directory pari-SAGE_LOCAL-no-deps
[pari-2.15.2-pre1] Attempting to download package pari-2.15.2-pre1.tar.gz from mirrors
[pari-2.15.2-pre1] https://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/www.sagemath.org/spkg/upstream/pari/pari-2.15.2-pre1.tar.gz
[pari-2.15.2-pre1] [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
[pari-2.15.2-pre1] ERROR [transfer|run:135]: [Errno 404] Not Found: '//www.mirrorservice.org/sites/www.sagemath.org/spkg/upstream/pari/pari-2.15.2-pre1.tar.gz'

what should I do? Put that tarball into my local upstream/ ?

[dimpase]

Replying to John Cremona:

@dimpase, to avoid these errors:

make --no-print-directory pari-SAGE_LOCAL-no-deps
[pari-2.15.2-pre1] Attempting to download package pari-2.15.2-pre1.tar.gz from mirrors
[pari-2.15.2-pre1] https://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/www.sagemath.org/spkg/upstream/pari/pari-2.15.2-pre1.tar.gz
[pari-2.15.2-pre1] [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
[pari-2.15.2-pre1] ERROR [transfer|run:135]: [Errno 404] Not Found: '//www.mirrorservice.org/sites/www.sagemath.org/spkg/upstream/pari/pari-2.15.2-pre1.tar.gz'

what should I do? Put that tarball into my local upstream/ ?

these errors are OK - but indeed, you can put the tarball into upstream/ to avoid chasing it down.

I also usually edit the mirror list to have just one entry - then these go quick

$ cat upstream/mirror_list
['https://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/www.sagemath.org/']

[cremona]

Thanks, that is working. When I saw those errors I assumed that nothing would work, not realising that after these failures it somehow knew to get it from ​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/pub/pari/snapshots/pari-2.15.2-pre1.tar.gz

[dimpase]

checksums.ini file has upstream-url field,used to fetch upstream tarball, if it can't be found in the mirrors. This is the default since a recent beta, to always try doing so.

[cremona]

With Dima's branch I get no test failures in the 4 files listed above. Were those test failures on a 32-bit machine? Otherwise I'm not sure what to do now.

[dimpase]

please change the ticket branch to your branch, and set it to needs review. It will get tested by bots then.

[dimpase]

yes, the errors are on a 32-bit machine.

[dimpase]

John, anyhow, if you post an improved as you outlined above branch, we can test it on GitHub actions.

[cremona]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

John, anyhow, if you post an improved as you outlined above branch, we can test it on GitHub actions.

OK -- so I will revise those tests which fail on 32-bit to make them work better with regard to non-deterministic outputs.

[cremona]

I changed all the problematic tests (except for the first one using @fork) in such a way that they test what they should without being affected by non-unique output. I have only tested this on a 64-bit machine.

---

New commits:

​7fe2fc9	#34537: make number_field_element tests more robust
​852f355	#34537: make number_field_ideal_rel tests more robust
​9364489	#34537: make qqbar tests more robust

[mkoeppe]

On 32bit (using FROM_DOCKER_REPOSITORY=ghcr.io/mkoeppe/sage/ FROM_DOCKER_TAG=9.5-107571-ga6e51e5bfe tox -e docker-debian-buster-i386-minimal-incremental):

./sage -tp --long src/sage/rings
All tests passed!

[cremona]

Can I as a reviewer give this a positive review? The changes I made we're almost all to do tests.

[cremona]

doctests

[dimpase]

yes, positive

[dimpase]

a bit too early - we need to set the URL for the tarball top the released 2.15.2, not to this snapshot (they should be equal though)

[dimpase]

purely mechanic change of the identical, but differently named, tarball

---

New commits:

​9e858c3

use the released 2.15.2 tarball

[mkoeppe]

With commit 9364489 (and some other tickets merged), I see the following on fedora-37-minimal (​https://github.com/mkoeppe/sage/actions/runs/3853109922/jobs/6586249291)

sage -t --random-seed=307282812518142614549559529759942029026 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/hom_frobenius.py
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/hom_frobenius.py", line 461, in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.hom_frobenius.EllipticCurveHom_frobenius.dual
Failed example:
    p in (2,3) or f.dual().dual() == f
Exception raised:
    Traceback (most recent call last):
      File "/sage/src/sage/doctest/forker.py", line 695, in _run
        self.compile_and_execute(example, compiler, test.globs)
      File "/sage/src/sage/doctest/forker.py", line 1093, in compile_and_execute
        exec(compiled, globs)
      File "<doctest sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.hom_frobenius.EllipticCurveHom_frobenius.dual[17]>", line 1, in <module>
        p in (Integer(2),Integer(3)) or f.dual().dual() == f
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      File "sage/structure/element.pyx", line 1109, in sage.structure.element.Element.__richcmp__
        return (<Element>self)._richcmp_(other, op)
      File "sage/categories/morphism.pyx", line 341, in sage.categories.morphism.Morphism._richcmp_
        cpdef _richcmp_(self, other, int op):
      File "/sage/src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/hom.py", line 221, in _richcmp_
        ret = self._comparison_impl(self, other, op)
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      File "/sage/src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/hom_composite.py", line 584, in _comparison_impl
        return compare_via_evaluation(left, right)
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      File "/sage/src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/hom.py", line 779, in compare_via_evaluation
        Ps = EE.gens()
             ^^^^^^^^^
      File "sage/misc/cachefunc.pyx", line 2297, in sage.misc.cachefunc.CachedMethodCallerNoArgs.__call__
        self.cache = f(self._instance)
      File "/sage/src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_finite_field.py", line 819, in gens
        card, ords, pts = self.__pari__().ellgroup(flag=1)
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      File "cypari2/auto_gen.pxi", line 8027, in cypari2.gen.Gen_base.ellgroup
      File "cypari2/handle_error.pyx", line 213, in cypari2.handle_error._pari_err_handle
    cypari2.handle_error.PariError: impossible inverse in Fl_inv: Mod(31, 31)
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  19 in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.hom_frobenius.EllipticCurveHom_frobenius.dual
    [117 tests, 1 failure, 13.47 s]

To inspect: docker run -it ghcr.io/mkoeppe/sage/sage-docker-fedora-37-minimal-with-targets-optional:9.5-107758-g45159d349c

[cremona]

This error is caused by some other newly merged patch #33915. I think the author of that (Lorenz Penny) needs to look at this.

It will be a very great pity if the pari upgrade missed this release!

[mkoeppe]

Thanks for the pointer! I've opened #34900 for this failure.

[lorenz]

The failure seems to be due to a PARI bug which is unrelated to both #33915 and this ticket. I added a minimal failing example to #34900.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1 and set ticket back to needs_review. New commits:

​ee4094f

add patch for Pari bug #2441, cf trac 34900

[dimpase]

Add a patch to fix #34900 - see also comment:145

[cremona]

As with #34900 we can trust the upstream patch,

[vbraun]

I'm still getting this on 32-bit ​http://build.sagemath.org/#/builders/47/builds/27

**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_number_field.py", line 2297, in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_number_field.EllipticCurve_number_field.gens
Failed example:
    E.rank(), E.gens(lim3=12)  # long time (about 4s)
Expected:
    (1,
     [(369/25*y^3 + 539/25*y^2 + 1178/25*y + 1718/25 : -29038/125*y^3 - 43003/125*y^2 - 92706/125*y - 137286/125 : 1)])
Got:
    (1, [])
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_number_field.py", line 2647, in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_number_field.EllipticCurve_number_field.isogeny_class
Failed example:
    C.matrix()  # long time
Expected:
    [1 2 2 4 4 2]
    [2 1 2 4 2 4]
    [2 2 1 2 4 4]
    [4 4 2 1 3 3]
    [4 2 4 3 1 3]
    [2 4 4 3 3 1]
Got:
    [1 2 2 2 4 4]
    [2 1 2 4 4 2]
    [2 2 1 4 2 4]
    [2 4 4 1 3 3]
    [4 4 2 3 1 3]
    [4 2 4 3 3 1]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_number_field.py", line 2679, in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_number_field.EllipticCurve_number_field.isogeny_class
Failed example:
    G.adjacency_matrix()  # long time
Expected:
    [0 1 1 0 0 1]
    [1 0 1 0 1 0]
    [1 1 0 1 0 0]
    [0 0 1 0 1 1]
    [0 1 0 1 0 1]
    [1 0 0 1 1 0]
Got:
    [0 1 1 1 0 0]
    [1 0 1 0 0 1]
    [1 1 0 0 1 0]
    [1 0 0 0 1 1]
    [0 0 1 1 0 1]
    [0 1 0 1 1 0]
**********************************************************************
2 items had failures:
   1 of  17 in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_number_field.EllipticCurve_number_field.gens
   2 of  75 in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_number_field.EllipticCurve_number_field.isogeny_class
    [843 tests, 3 failures, 236.47 s]
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/isogeny_small_degree.py", line 1208, in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.isogeny_small_degree.isogenies_13_0
Failed example:
    [phi.codomain().ainvs() for phi in isogenies_13_0(E)]  # long time (4s)
Expected:
    [(0,
      0,
      20360599/165164973653422080*a^11 - 3643073/41291243413355520*a^10 + 1887439/1146978983704320*a^9 + 5557619461/573489491852160*a^8 - 82824971/11947697746920*a^7 + 1030632647/7965131831280*a^6 - 475752603733/29409717530880*a^5 + 87205112531/7352429382720*a^4 - 43618899433/204234149520*a^3 + 5858744881/12764634345*a^2 - 1858703809/2836585410*a + 2535050171/1418292705,
      -139861295/2650795873449984*a^11 - 3455957/5664093746688*a^10 - 345310571/50976843720192*a^9 - 500530795/118001953056*a^8 - 12860048113/265504394376*a^7 - 25007420461/44250732396*a^6 + 458134176455/1416023436672*a^5 + 16701880631/9077073312*a^4 + 155941666417/9077073312*a^3 + 3499310115/378211388*a^2 - 736774863/94552847*a - 21954102381/94552847,
      8342795944891/198197968384106496*a^11 + 8908625263589/20645621706677760*a^10 + 53130542636623/6881873902225920*a^9 + 376780111042213/114697898370432*a^8 + 614884052146333/15930263662560*a^7 + 3566768133324359/7965131831280*a^6 - 1885593809102545/35291661037056*a^5 - 2443732172026523/3676214691360*a^4 - 9525729503937541/1225404897120*a^3 + 51990274442321/40846829904*a^2 + 67834019370596/4254878115*a + 267603083706812/1418292705),
     (0,
      0,
      20360599/165164973653422080*a^11 - 3643073/41291243413355520*a^10 + 1887439/1146978983704320*a^9 + 5557619461/573489491852160*a^8 - 82824971/11947697746920*a^7 + 1030632647/7965131831280*a^6 - 475752603733/29409717530880*a^5 + 87205112531/7352429382720*a^4 - 43618899433/204234149520*a^3 + 5858744881/12764634345*a^2 - 1858703809/2836585410*a + 2535050171/1418292705,
      -6465569317/1325397936724992*a^11 - 112132307/1960647835392*a^10 - 17075412917/25488421860096*a^9 - 207832519229/531008788752*a^8 - 1218275067617/265504394376*a^7 - 9513766502551/177002929584*a^6 + 4297077855437/708011718336*a^5 + 354485975837/4538536656*a^4 + 4199379308059/4538536656*a^3 - 30841577919/189105694*a^2 - 181916484042/94552847*a - 2135779171614/94552847,
      -1316873026840277/34172063514501120*a^11 - 18637401045099413/41291243413355520*a^10 - 36382234917217247/6881873902225920*a^9 - 61142238484016213/19775499719040*a^8 - 576888119306045123/15930263662560*a^7 - 3378443313906256321/7965131831280*a^6 + 326466167429333279/6084769144320*a^5 + 4620083325391594991/7352429382720*a^4 + 9018783894167184149/1225404897120*a^3 - 9206015742300283/7042556880*a^2 - 65141531411426446/4254878115*a - 254321286054666133/1418292705)]
Got:
    [(0,
      0,
      20360599/165164973653422080*a^11 - 3643073/41291243413355520*a^10 - 101/8789110986240*a^9 + 5557619461/573489491852160*a^8 - 82824971/11947697746920*a^7 - 19487/21127670640*a^6 - 475752603733/29409717530880*a^5 + 87205112531/7352429382720*a^4 + 8349/521670880*a^3 + 5858744881/12764634345*a^2 - 1858703809/2836585410*a + 58759402/48906645,
      -139861295/2650795873449984*a^11 - 3455957/5664093746688*a^10 - 345310571/50976843720192*a^9 - 500530795/118001953056*a^8 - 12860048113/265504394376*a^7 - 25007420461/44250732396*a^6 + 458134176455/1416023436672*a^5 + 16701880631/9077073312*a^4 + 155941666417/9077073312*a^3 + 3499310115/378211388*a^2 - 736774863/94552847*a - 21954102381/94552847,
      579363345221/13763747804451840*a^11 + 371192377511/860234237778240*a^10 + 8855090365657/1146978983704320*a^9 + 5367261541663/1633873196160*a^8 + 614883554332193/15930263662560*a^7 + 30485197378483/68078049840*a^6 - 131000897588387/2450809794240*a^5 - 203628705777949/306351224280*a^4 - 1587619388190379/204234149520*a^3 + 14435069706551/11346341640*a^2 + 7537273048614/472764235*a + 89198980034806/472764235),
     (0,
      0,
      20360599/165164973653422080*a^11 - 3643073/41291243413355520*a^10 - 101/8789110986240*a^9 + 5557619461/573489491852160*a^8 - 82824971/11947697746920*a^7 - 19487/21127670640*a^6 - 475752603733/29409717530880*a^5 + 87205112531/7352429382720*a^4 + 8349/521670880*a^3 + 5858744881/12764634345*a^2 - 1858703809/2836585410*a + 58759402/48906645,
      -6465569317/1325397936724992*a^11 - 112132307/1960647835392*a^10 - 17075412917/25488421860096*a^9 - 207832519229/531008788752*a^8 - 1218275067617/265504394376*a^7 - 9513766502551/177002929584*a^6 + 4297077855437/708011718336*a^5 + 354485975837/4538536656*a^4 + 4199379308059/4538536656*a^3 - 30841577919/189105694*a^2 - 181916484042/94552847*a - 2135779171614/94552847,
      -132601797212627/3440936951112960*a^11 - 6212467020502021/13763747804451840*a^10 - 1515926454902497/286744745926080*a^9 - 15154913741799637/4901619588480*a^8 - 576888119803859263/15930263662560*a^7 - 86626751639648671/204234149520*a^6 + 16436657569218427/306351224280*a^5 + 1540027900265659087/2450809794240*a^4 + 375782662805915809/51058537380*a^3 - 14831920924677883/11346341640*a^2 - 7237947774817724/472764235*a - 84773764066089509/472764235)]
**********************************************************************
1 item had failures:
   1 of  21 in sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.isogeny_small_degree.isogenies_13_0
    [307 tests, 1 failure, 56.94 s]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_number_field.py  # 3 doctests failed
sage -t --long --random-seed=0 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/isogeny_small_degree.py  # 1 doctest failed
----------------------------------------------------------------------

[dimpase]

could it be the latest patch?

[cremona]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

could it be the latest patch?

Possibly. In the first one it's a bit strange that with the same search bound that generator was not found, but any changes in number field implementation can change whether specific number field elements fall inside or outside the bound. The difference in the two matrices will happen of the isogenous curves are sorted differently and this will depend on the models obtained, again dependent on such details. Same with the last one -- I did actually check that the two sets of coefficients define isomorphic curves, i.e. we just have a slightly different model.

It is annoying having to keep these 32-bit differences. What would you like to do this time? For the last one we could just output the number of isogenies, not the coefficients of the codomains. For the first isogeny matrix, I do want to keep that output as it is a great example and the docstring right after it describes the structure of the matrix in detail (and this description is still valid) -- so perhaps, put #random against these two. All I can suggest for the first one is to increase lim3 from 12 to 13, which will not take much longer and might give the generator even on 32-bit.

[dimpase]

OK, I'm now going to try a 32-bit docker image of Ubuntu, as in ​https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/portability_testing.html to run these tests. (docker pull i386/debian, etc)

Sorry for this never-ending mess.

[dimpase]

All I can suggest for the first one is to increase lim3 from 12 to 13, which will not take much longer and might give the generator even on 32-bit.

OK, I was able to reproduce this in Docker. Indeed, increasing lim3 to 13 here gives

sage: E.rank(), E.gens(lim3=13)
(1,
 [(-369/25*y^3 + 539/25*y^2 - 1178/25*y + 1718/25 : -27193/125*y^3 + 39683/125*y^2 - 86816/125*y + 126696/125 : 1)])

instead of

 [(369/25*y^3 + 539/25*y^2 + 1178/25*y + 1718/25 : -29038/125*y^3 - 43003/125*y^2 - 92706/125*y - 137286/125 : 1)])

Is it OK? The 1st coordinate of the point is obtained by changing y to -y, but the 2nd seems to be totally different. If so, I'm going to do

src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_number_field.py

@@ -2294 +2294 @@
             sage: E = EllipticCurve(K, [1, 0, 5*y^2 + 16, 0, 0])
             sage: E.gens(lim1=1, lim3=1)
             []
-            sage: E.rank(), E.gens(lim3=12)  # long time (about 4s)
-            (1,
-             [(369/25*y^3 + 539/25*y^2 + 1178/25*y + 1718/25 : -29038/125*y^3 - 43003/125*y^2 - 92706/125*y - 137286/125 : 1)])
+            sage: E.rank()
+            1
+            sage: E.gens(lim3=13)  # long time (about 4s)
+            [(... : 1)]
 
         Here is a curve of rank 2::
 

[cremona]

Almost certainly fine. Negating the point would give just as valid a generator, and the negative has the same X coordinate.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1 and set ticket back to needs_review. This was a forced push. Last 10 new commits:

​a318646	correct minimal version of pari
​b164a38	Fix 9.8.beta1 rebase
​7bef166	bump version to 2.15.1
​f61b922	try out 32-bit fix from upstream
​77b7786	#34537: make number_field_element tests more robust
​37dcd37	#34537: make number_field_ideal_rel tests more robust
​52e18fb	#34537: make qqbar tests more robust
​25e4e41	use the released 2.15.2 tarball
​af4f715	add patch for Pari bug #2441, cf trac 34900
​238f4de	fixed doctests for elliptic curves on 32-bit

[dimpase]

rebased and fixed 32-bit tests, mostly as proposed by John - added an extra test checking that the graph arising there is indeed a triangular prism (Sage can do this in 1 line ;-))

[cremona]

Replying to John Cremona:

Almost certainly fine. Negating the point would give just as valid a generator, and the negative has the same X coordinate.

I looked at this more carefully, and it is 100% correct, though whoever wrote this test should have known better than to call the field generator y. Both y and -y are field generators since the field's defining polynomial is x^4+x^2-7, and the coefficients of the curve are (1, 0, 5*y^2 + 16, 0, 0) (hence the confusion if you just display the curve as it displays its equation in variables x,y), so replacing y by -y in the coordinates of any point give another point, which explains Dima's observation about the x-coordinates. And my observation also explains the difference in y-coordinates:

sage: P
(369/25*y^3 + 539/25*y^2 + 1178/25*y + 1718/25 : -29038/125*y^3 - 43003/125*y^2 - 92706/125*y - 137286/125 : 1)
sage: -P
(369/25*y^3 + 539/25*y^2 + 1178/25*y + 1718/25 : 27193/125*y^3 + 39683/125*y^2 + 86816/125*y + 126696/125 : 1)

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​c7654e8

rename the gen, and do basic tests on the found generator

[dimpase]

here I renamed y->t, and added basic sanity checks for the latter test. Positive review?

[cremona]

Replying to Dima Pasechnik:

here I renamed y->t, and added basic sanity checks for the latter test. Positive review?

Yes from me, thanks.

[dimpase]

unfortunately upstream found the fix for ​https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=2441 lacking, and proposed another patch.

[git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

​e8cfad0

use different patch from upstream

[cremona]

I see that Bill said "The previous patch fixes this example but not other similar ones." after analysing the problem in detail, so certainly we should go with the new patch.

[dimpase]

let's move this. Works on 32 bit, etc.

[mkoeppe]

Follow up: #34959 Fix doctest in sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_number_field.py