Skip to content
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

Coercion between algebraic polyhedra fails #28776

Open
kliem opened this issue Nov 20, 2019 · 12 comments
Open

Coercion between algebraic polyhedra fails #28776

kliem opened this issue Nov 20, 2019 · 12 comments

Comments

@kliem
Copy link
Contributor

kliem commented Nov 20, 2019

For the following polyhedra all things involving coercion fail.

sage: P = polytopes.icosahedron(); P
A 3-dimensional polyhedron in (Number Field in sqrt5 with defining polynomial x^2 - 5 with sqrt5 = 2.236067977499790?)^3 defined as the convex hull of 12 vertices
sage: P1 = polytopes.small_rhombicuboctahedron(); P1
A 3-dimensional polyhedron in (Number Field in sqrt2 with defining polynomial x^2 - 2 with sqrt2 = 1.414213562373095?)^3 defined as the convex hull of 24 vertices

It seems to boil down to two issues:

Do we want to change that design for polyhedra? I think it is reasonable to coerce polyhedra over number fields by default. At least when there is exactly one composite field.

Depends on #28770

CC: @jplab @LaisRast @videlec

Component: geometry

Keywords: algebraic polyhedra, quadratic fields

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/28776

@kliem kliem added this to the sage-9.0 milestone Nov 20, 2019
@kliem

This comment has been minimized.

@kliem
Copy link
Contributor Author

kliem commented Nov 20, 2019

Changed dependencies from #28770, #28774 to #28770, #28774, #28778

@kliem
Copy link
Contributor Author

kliem commented Nov 20, 2019

Changed dependencies from #28770, #28774, #28778 to #28770, #28774

@kliem

This comment has been minimized.

@kliem
Copy link
Contributor Author

kliem commented Nov 20, 2019

comment:3

As was pointed out to me, it is not desirable to coerce number fields to the smallest field in general. As it is not canonical, fragile and expensive.

However, it seems to be desirable for polyhedra, isn't it? Would it make sense to implement that somewhat as a standard behavior, e.g. that a polyhedron over QQ[sqrt(2)] and one over QQ[sqrt(3)] are coerced to one over QQ[sqrt(2) + sqrt(3)]?

@kliem
Copy link
Contributor Author

kliem commented Dec 5, 2019

Changed dependencies from #28770, #28774 to #28770

@kliem

This comment has been minimized.

@embray
Copy link
Contributor

embray commented Jan 6, 2020

comment:5

Ticket retargeted after milestone closed

@embray embray modified the milestones: sage-9.0, sage-9.1 Jan 6, 2020
@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

mkoeppe commented May 1, 2020

comment:6

Moving tickets to milestone sage-9.2 based on a review of last modification date, branch status, and severity.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.1, sage-9.2 May 1, 2020
@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.2, sage-9.3 Oct 24, 2020
@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

mkoeppe commented Apr 2, 2021

comment:8

Moving this ticket to 9.4, as it seems unlikely that it will be merged in 9.3, which is in the release candidate stage

@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.3, sage-9.4 Apr 2, 2021
@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

mkoeppe commented Jul 19, 2021

comment:9

Setting a new milestone for this ticket based on a cursory review.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.4, sage-9.5 Jul 19, 2021
@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

mkoeppe commented Dec 18, 2021

comment:10

Stalled in needs_review or needs_info; likely won't make it into Sage 9.5.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.5, sage-9.6 Dec 18, 2021
@mkoeppe mkoeppe removed this from the sage-9.6 milestone Apr 11, 2022
@mkoeppe mkoeppe added this to the sage-9.7 milestone Apr 11, 2022
@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.7, sage-9.8 Aug 31, 2022
@mkoeppe mkoeppe removed this from the sage-9.8 milestone Jan 29, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants