| 1 | initial version |
Meanwhile I made more experiments. The smallest polynomial degree forcing the error is 2^16. So I expect that the currently installed Singular version uses unsigned 16-bit words for exponents (and that the previous version had a larger representation, there I generated polynomials up to a degree of 27 bits then my computer was at the edge of its memory).
I had also a look on Singular's home page but I did not find any hint on technical restrictions or on internal data representation.
As workaround, I will try to re-install SageMath-7.3 from the Git repository. I hope the repository contains besides SageMath's core also the then actual external libraries.
| 2 | No.2 Revision |
Meanwhile I made more experiments. The smallest polynomial degree forcing the error is 2^16. So I expect that the currently installed Singular version uses unsigned 16-bit words for exponents (and that the previous version had a larger representation, there I generated polynomials up to a degree of 27 bits then my computer was at the edge of its memory).
I had also a look on Singular's home page but I did not find any hint on technical restrictions or on internal data representation.
As workaround, I will try to re-install SageMath-7.3 from the Git repository. I hope the repository contains besides SageMath's core also the then actual external libraries.
Addendum (15-02-2017) :
It is a Singular problem since I misused Singular for its availability to handle sparse polynomials, also univariate ones (FLINT, NTL don't). The polynomial ring is created for a given prime number p by PolynomialRing(GF(p),1,"x"). The second argument 1 forces SageMath to switch to Singular.
The "bug" is not a bug, it is a restriction (16 bit exponents) implemented in Singular's official release. Unfortunately, Singular does not publish its restrictions (at least, I did not found one when reading its home page forth an back), so the violated restriction appeared as a bug. What about adding a comment in SageMath's documentation of PolynomialRing?
By contrast, version SageMath-7.3 included a modification of Singular where the restriction was set to 32 or 64 bit exponents, so the bug did not occur.
| 3 | No.3 Revision |
Meanwhile I made more experiments. The smallest polynomial degree forcing the error is 2^16. So I expect that the currently installed Singular version uses unsigned 16-bit words for exponents (and that the previous version had a larger representation, there I generated polynomials up to a degree of 27 bits then my computer was at the edge of its memory).
I had also a look on Singular's home page but I did not find any hint on technical restrictions or on internal data representation.
As workaround, I will try to re-install SageMath-7.3 from the Git repository. I hope the repository contains besides SageMath's core also the then actual external libraries.
Addendum (15-02-2017) :
It is a Singular problem since I misused Singular for its availability ability to handle sparse polynomials, also univariate ones (FLINT, NTL don't). The polynomial ring is created for a given prime number p by PolynomialRing(GF(p),1,"x"). The second argument 1 forces SageMath to switch to Singular.
The "bug" is not a bug, it is a restriction (16 bit exponents) implemented in Singular's official release. Unfortunately, Singular does not publish its restrictions (at least, I did not found one when reading its home page forth an back), so the violated restriction appeared as a bug. What about adding a comment in SageMath's documentation of PolynomialRing?
By contrast, version SageMath-7.3 included a modification of Singular where the restriction was set to 32 or 64 bit exponents, so the bug did not occur.
Copyright Sage, 2010. Some rights reserved under creative commons license. Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.