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
UniqueRepresentation issue with PowerSeriesRing #18416
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:3
Does anyone know the status of this? The corresponding behavior for LaurentSeries was deprecated in #16201 (which also mentions power series) and finally removed in #26915 . So now we are in the situation where PowerSeries and LaurentSeries work quite differently here, I can't see any real reason for this. |
comment:4
+1 on deprecating the |
comment:5
Even worse in terms of hidden side effects:
|
comment:6
yes, this should definitely be changed |
comment:7
Moving all blocker/critical issues from 8.7 to 8.8. |
comment:8
Moving open critical and blocker issues to the next release milestone (optimistically). |
comment:9
Ticket retargeted after milestone closed |
comment:12
I propose to go back to the idea from #16201. In particular, we should handle the whole precision business using a global variable. If desired, one could introduce several global variables (e.g. one for univariate power series and another for multivariate). I'll upload a branch soon. |
comment:14
Okay, this is tricky: mostly all doctests heavily rely on the
or we have to establish each example with the default precision. At least, this behavior would be expected with the proposed changes, whereas now it is entirely random to the user. Alternatively, we come up with an entirely different solution. I am open for suggestions. |
comment:16
So, this my first approach. Since the global variable If this meets your approval, we have to think what we should do with the failed doctests. I know, this is a big change. But the current behavior should not be further promoted either. New commits:
|
Changed keywords from none to power_series |
Commit: |
comment:38
Okay, this class is used nowhere else. Instead, I have deprecated the method in |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:40
The only things I would change before giving a positive review (with a green patchbot) are the deprecation message to
and this -The default precision of a power series ring instance stays fixed and
-cannot be changed. To work with different default precisions, we must
-establish new instances instead::
+The default precision of a power series ring stays fixed and
+cannot be changed. To work with different default precision, create
+a new power series ring:: |
comment:42
There we go. :) |
comment:43
changing src/bin/sage is not a thing to do |
comment:44
I merged #31263 to use the Rebase? |
comment:45
|
Dependencies: #31263 |
comment:46
That is good to know. Thank you for pointing this out. Travis, are you satisfied? |
Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw |
comment:47
Yep. LGTM. Thank you. |
comment:48
|
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:50
Just one character missing...here we go. |
Changed branch from u/gh-mjungmath/uniquerepresentation_issue_with_powerseriesring to |
The power series ring (
sage.rings.power_series_ring.PowerSeriesRing
) inherits fromUniqueRepresentation
. In the argument of the constructor there is the precision (prec
) but it can be modified! Which leads to wrong behaviorMoreover, a function can modify a power series in use
Depends on #31263
CC: @nilesjohnson @simon-king-jena @tscrim @slel
Component: algebra
Keywords: power_series
Author: Michael Jung
Branch/Commit:
f38b78e
Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18416
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: