-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 123
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Better pbw ideals arith #1591
Merged
Merged
Better pbw ideals arith #1591
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why is this now checked by default? Isn't this horribly expensive?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps we should discuss this in general and set a standard: speed over correctness or correctness over speed? Both have clear pros and cons...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Personally I prefer correct, slow results over wrong, fast results... but of course we all prefer correct & fast results... The question is whether to expect people to explicitly say "trust me, I am an expert" (so it's their own fault for running against a wall; but it our fault if things are "slow" if one does not know about
check=false
). On the other hand, will people who are more cautious expect our functions to not validate inputs by default? Hmmm...So yeah, my preference actually is to have
check=true
the default everywhere and then expect everyone to explicitly saycheck=false
if they are sure about it. But I also realize I may be a minority here :-)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think that if the default is
check = false
, it makes thecheck
argument useless. Then the only reason one would want to call a function withcheck = true
is if one expects that the input is not valid. But then one should call the function which validates the input and not wait for an error in the constructor.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not suggesting to start with
check = false
as default. Here is another example from the section on modules:Warning
The functions do not check whether the resulting homomorphism is well-defined, that is, whether it sends the relations of M into the relations of N.
If you are uncertain with regard to well-definedness, use the function below. Note, however, that the check performed by the function requires a Gröbner basis computation. This may take some time.
is_welldefined(a::ModuleFPHom)
Return true if a is well-defined, and false otherwise.
I agree that we should agree on discussing this in general.
In the current example, we could do some time checks first.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, it is just O(nvars^3) multiplications and additions in the algebra.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
O.k., thanks!