Tommy Hofmann
Tommy Hofmann
@fieker does that make sense?
It is not clear to me that this right thing. `length` is not part of the interface and exporting `pol_length` was a mistake in the first place. A faithful representation...
@fieker this now goes up to `precision(x) -1`. Are you happy with this?
Yes, the idea was to combine it with something like `is_known(F, :is_field)` and to use `RREF` in this case (make it a runtime thing). We might have to untangle this...
I am wondering. Isn't the parent check kind of important? And if we don't do parent checks, are we really testing the ring interface?
My point was that it makes sense to test that the result of `c = add!(a, b)` has the same parent as `a + b`. Because in the near future...
Yes, if you put garbage into the `add!` function, you get garbage out. But the `test_elem` functions do not produce garbage and we never test the mutating functions with garbage...
cleaned it up in #1640
Merged via #1640