Re: znlog() behavior

Max Alekseyev on Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:51:32 +0200

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: znlog() behavior

To: pari-users <pari-users@list.cr.yp.to>
Subject: Re: znlog() behavior
From: Max Alekseyev <maxale@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:49:28 +0400
Delivery-date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:51:32 +0200
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HkxuSV8cLHy4GgT9zLONB8X+aZJoFRO+XhfD+pjrkoA=; b=MV1LrtXX8TKeCAREu5d5NhVFmcvdA6XI/9iWV7O20k2sGB8LhLYH8RmqYTs0188jMe CkkEIujehKuCxA4Z3y10Jkyh/eOsvITOFDpEnCWiT6bLlR+o+v0s3vQKQWsnF27jhsRo TeHX7DmgYCosx1kg/T9DKVS2nNmog9oXuyt9c=
In-reply-to: <CAJkPp5OT9emHBqrj5qUJqOHp-T_SQJmZvDrd-skSLBMQfOJoVg@mail.gmail.com>
Mailing-list: contact pari-users-help@list.cr.yp.to; run by ezmlm
References: <CAJkPp5OT9emHBqrj5qUJqOHp-T_SQJmZvDrd-skSLBMQfOJoVg@mail.gmail.com>

It seems that the actual reason is that 2^67-1 is a product of two
primes as has no primitive root.
Would it be more natural and intuitive if znprimroot() complained about that?
Regards,
Max

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Max Alekseyev <maxale@gmail.com> wrote:
> I suspect the following error (issued by pari/gp development svn-13224
> version) is a bug, isn't it?
>
> ? znlog(2,znprimroot(2^67-1))
> Â*** Â at top-level: znlog(2,znprimroot(2
> Â*** Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ^--------------------
> Â*** znlog: gen_Shanks_log: supplied order (= 67) is incorrect.
>
> Regards,
> Max
>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: znlog() behavior
  - From: Karim Belabas <Karim.Belabas@math.u-bordeaux1.fr>

References:
- znlog() behavior
  - From: Max Alekseyev <maxale@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: znlog() behavior
Next by Date: Re: znlog() behavior
Previous by thread: znlog() behavior
Next by thread: Re: znlog() behavior
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread