Improve comparision for ZZRingElem and QQFieldElem; add some missing `fits` methods and make others faster; and more
All changes were carefully benchmarked, but there is too much and I am too tired to include details. But many things got faster by a factor 2 of this -- and in practice one can hope for even more, because ccalls were replaced by direct code; the Julia compiler can inline and optimize the latter but not the former.
Codecov Report
:x: Patch coverage is 86.66667% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
:white_check_mark: Project coverage is 88.18%. Comparing base (f9ccb66) to head (6aa8343).
| Files with missing lines | Patch % | Lines |
|---|---|---|
| src/flint/fmpq.jl | 66.66% | 5 Missing :warning: |
| src/flint/fmpz.jl | 96.42% | 1 Missing :warning: |
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2170 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 88.19% 88.18% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 99 99
Lines 37190 37191 +1
==========================================
- Hits 32798 32796 -2
- Misses 4392 4395 +3
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
:rocket: New features to boost your workflow:
- :snowflake: Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
Test error is
Test Failed at /home/runner/work/Nemo.jl/Nemo.jl/oscar-dev/Oscar/test/Rings/integer.jl:357
Expression: Int(ZZ(typemin(Int)) - 1)
Expected: InexactError
No exception thrown
which indeed should throw I think.
The error was caused by mixing up <= and >= sigh.
And I copied all those ZZ tests from Oscar to here. I really don't understand why they are in Oscar in the first place?!
To make sure that ZZ and QQ construct things of the right type, but it appears we then added some more.