-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 480
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
trivial __copy__ and __deepcopy__ methods for number field elements #32478
Comments
comment:2
As mentioned in #13811 comment:37, the change for New commits:
|
Commit: |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:5
The failures came from the defective pattern discussed in #13811 comment:49, fixed now. |
Author: Matthias Koeppe |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:
|
comment:8
A while-we-are-at-it, we probably should optimize
Otherwise LGTM. |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:10
Thank you. Sorry, there one other doc thing I just noticed. For |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw |
comment:12
Thank you. LGTM. |
comment:13
Thanks! |
Changed branch from u/mkoeppe/trivial___copy___and___deepcopy___methods_for_number_field_elements to |
(split out from #13811, follow-up on #32454)
Most Sage objects are immutable. Nevertheless,
copy
anddeepcopy
make copies (through pickling/unpickling) for them because we have not provided the classes with__copy__
methods (which should just return the object) and__deepcopy__
methods (which in many cases should just return the object).In this ticket, we take care of number field elements.
CC: @tscrim @nbruin @kwankyu @videlec @mezzarobba
Component: number fields
Author: Matthias Koeppe
Branch/Commit:
e971073
Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/32478
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: