#9666 closed enhancement (duplicate)
Implement __hash__ for NumberFieldIdeal
Reported by: | jdemeyer | Owned by: | davidloeffler |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | minor | Milestone: | sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix |
Component: | number fields | Keywords: | |
Cc: | Merged in: | ||
Authors: | Jeroen Demeyer | Reviewers: | |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description
I propose to use a HNF Z-basis of number field ideals to compute the hash of an ideal.
Attachments (1)
Change History (8)
Changed 13 years ago by
Attachment: | 9666.patch added |
---|
comment:1 Changed 13 years ago by
Status: | new → needs_review |
---|
comment:2 Changed 13 years ago by
Status: | needs_review → needs_work |
---|
comment:3 Changed 13 years ago by
comment:4 Changed 13 years ago by
When I ran the test suite there were a bunch of failures in
devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_quotient_ring.py
e.g.,
File "/mnt/usb1/scratch/wstein/build/sage-4.5.2.rc0/devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_quotient_ring.py", line 1141: sage: D.selmer_group([K.ideal(2, -a+1), K.ideal(3, a+1), K.ideal(a)], 3) Expected: [2, -a - 1, -a] Got: [2, -a - 1, a]
comment:5 Changed 13 years ago by
Milestone: | sage-4.5.3 → sage-4.6 |
---|
Apologies. I did not expect the hash to have influence on this, I should have tested better.
I will postpone this to the release after the PARI upgrade, i.e. sage-4.6.1 or something.
comment:6 Changed 12 years ago by
Resolution: | → duplicate |
---|---|
Status: | needs_work → closed |
The same is fixed correctly in #9400. So I'm closing this as a dupe of that.
comment:7 Changed 12 years ago by
Milestone: | sage-4.6 → sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix |
---|
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
You need to add a doctest that illustrates use of the hash function, on both 32 and 64-bit computers.