Misc cleanup

[fingolfin]

• Fix typo
• Move some ZZMatrix code to fmpz_mat.jl
• Enable 'f(x)' support where f is an arb/acb/real/complex poly
• Remove redundant is_zero_row methods

For further details please refer to the respective commit messages.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 52.22222% with 43 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 85.59%. Comparing base (2c69d79) to head (0d0b53e).

❗ Current head 0d0b53e differs from pull request most recent head 5887a5a

Please upload reports for the commit 5887a5a to get more accurate results.

Files	Patch %	Lines
src/flint/fmpz_mat.jl	52.22%	43 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1770      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.80%   85.59%   -0.21%     
==========================================
  Files          95       95              
  Lines       36870    36905      +35     
==========================================
- Hits        31636    31590      -46     
- Misses       5234     5315      +81     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[fingolfin]

I note that there is an existing function reduce_mod which seems to do the same, albeit with a direct call to function fmpz_mat_scalar_mod_fmpz which I am guessing be more efficient?

What should we do, keep both reduce_mod and mod? Or merge them? Thoughts, @fieker @thofma ?

[lgoettgens]

apart from the one unresolved question, this looks good

[lgoettgens]

Unfortunately we have conflicts with #1768

[fingolfin]

rebased. And I've filed #1773 for reduce_mod vs. mod, we don't need to settle it in this PR -- at least now the code for both is next to each other, making the duplication a bit more "obvious"

[lgoettgens]

rebased. And I've filed #1773 for reduce_mod vs. mod, we don't need to settle it in this PR -- at least now the code for both is next to each other, making the duplication a bit more "obvious"

Thanks for both!