Update using trac-to-github @ fe82d21

Author: Matthias Koeppe

Issues-01xxx/1314.md

@@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ I had some old code from awhile back for computing this which I've attached, alo
 archive/issue_comments_005971.json:
 ```json
 {
-    "body": "<div id=\"comment:13\" align=\"right\">comment:13</div>\n\nReplying to [@mwhansen](#comment%3A12):\n\n> I had some old code from awhile back for computing this which I've attached, along with some commented out possible optimizations.  I think I remember when doing this in practice, avoiding copying the graph saved quite a bit of time (hence the unmerge function).\n\nmhansen, thanks for sharing this code.  Unfortunately, it does not seem to give the right answer for K_4:\n\nsage: G = graphs.[This is the Trac macro *CompleteGraph* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#CompleteGraph-macro)(4); G.allow_loops(true); G.allow_multiple_edges(true); tp = tutte_polynomial(G,x,y); tp\n\nx<sup>2</sup>*y<sup>2</sup> + x*y<sup>3</sup> + x<sup>3</sup> + x<sup>2</sup>*y + x*y<sup>2</sup> + x<sup>2</sup> + x*y\n\nThe actual Tutte polynomial of K4 is x<sup>3</sup> + 3*x<sup>2</sup> + y<sup>3</sup> + 4*x*y + 3*y<sup>2</sup> + 2*x + 2*y.  \n\nI currently do not see a way to implement the Tutte polynomial without making lots of copies of graphs, but maybe someone else can.",
+    "body": "<div id=\"comment:13\" align=\"right\">comment:13</div>\n\nReplying to [@mwhansen](#comment%3A12):\n\n> I had some old code from awhile back for computing this which I've attached, along with some commented out possible optimizations.  I think I remember when doing this in practice, avoiding copying the graph saved quite a bit of time (hence the unmerge function).\n\nmhansen, thanks for sharing this code.  Unfortunately, it does not seem to give the right answer for K_4:\n\nsage: G = graphs.[Trac macro CompleteGraph](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#CompleteGraph-macro)(4); G.allow_loops(true); G.allow_multiple_edges(true); tp = tutte_polynomial(G,x,y); tp\n\nx<sup>2</sup>*y<sup>2</sup> + x*y<sup>3</sup> + x<sup>3</sup> + x<sup>2</sup>*y + x*y<sup>2</sup> + x<sup>2</sup> + x*y\n\nThe actual Tutte polynomial of K4 is x<sup>3</sup> + 3*x<sup>2</sup> + y<sup>3</sup> + 4*x*y + 3*y<sup>2</sup> + 2*x + 2*y.  \n\nI currently do not see a way to implement the Tutte polynomial without making lots of copies of graphs, but maybe someone else can.",
     "created_at": "2012-07-13T15:09:15Z",
     "formatter": "markdown",
     "issue": "https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/1314",
@@ -478,7 +478,7 @@ Replying to [@mwhansen](#comment%3A12):
 
 mhansen, thanks for sharing this code.  Unfortunately, it does not seem to give the right answer for K_4:
 
-sage: G = graphs.[This is the Trac macro *CompleteGraph* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#CompleteGraph-macro)(4); G.allow_loops(true); G.allow_multiple_edges(true); tp = tutte_polynomial(G,x,y); tp
+sage: G = graphs.[Trac macro CompleteGraph](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#CompleteGraph-macro)(4); G.allow_loops(true); G.allow_multiple_edges(true); tp = tutte_polynomial(G,x,y); tp
 
 x<sup>2</sup>*y<sup>2</sup> + x*y<sup>3</sup> + x<sup>3</sup> + x<sup>2</sup>*y + x*y<sup>2</sup> + x<sup>2</sup> + x*y
 

Issues-01xxx/1651.md

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ archive/issues_001651.json:
     "assignees": [
         "https://github.com/wdjoyner"
     ],
-    "body": "<div id=\"comment:0\"></div>\n\nReported by Harald Schilly:\n\nHere what I've tried (documentation does it a bit more \"difficult\",\nbut should be the same -- at least I hope so)\nhttp://www.sagemath.org/doc/html/const/node37.html\n\nC = HammingCode(2,GF(5))\nv = matrix(GF(5),[This is the Trac macro *1,0,0,2,1,0* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#1,0,0,2,1,0-macro))\nC.decode(v)\n\nworks (at least no errors), but\n\nv = vector(GF(5),[1,0,0,2,1,0])\nC.decode(v)\n\nsays:\n\nTypeError: Gap produced error output\nPermutation: <expr> must be a positive integer (not a integer)\nexecuting $sage333:=(1, 0, 0, 2, 1, 0);;\n\nI can see the different braces in the output, but internally a 1xn/nx1\nmatrix should handled in some way the same as a vector.\n\n\nComponent: **coding theory**\n\n_Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/1651_\n\n",
+    "body": "<div id=\"comment:0\"></div>\n\nReported by Harald Schilly:\n\nHere what I've tried (documentation does it a bit more \"difficult\",\nbut should be the same -- at least I hope so)\nhttp://www.sagemath.org/doc/html/const/node37.html\n\nC = HammingCode(2,GF(5))\nv = matrix(GF(5),[[1,0,0,2,1,0]])\nC.decode(v)\n\nworks (at least no errors), but\n\nv = vector(GF(5),[1,0,0,2,1,0])\nC.decode(v)\n\nsays:\n\nTypeError: Gap produced error output\nPermutation: <expr> must be a positive integer (not a integer)\nexecuting $sage333:=(1, 0, 0, 2, 1, 0);;\n\nI can see the different braces in the output, but internally a 1xn/nx1\nmatrix should handled in some way the same as a vector.\n\n\nComponent: **coding theory**\n\n_Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/1651_\n\n",
     "closed_at": "2008-02-16T17:25:32Z",
     "created_at": "2008-01-01T14:46:56Z",
     "labels": [
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ but should be the same -- at least I hope so)
 http://www.sagemath.org/doc/html/const/node37.html
 
 C = HammingCode(2,GF(5))
-v = matrix(GF(5),[This is the Trac macro *1,0,0,2,1,0* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#1,0,0,2,1,0-macro))
+v = matrix(GF(5),[[1,0,0,2,1,0]])
 C.decode(v)
 
 works (at least no errors), but

Issues-01xxx/1956.md

@@ -5739,7 +5739,7 @@ Apply trac_1956_multi_power_series_new_4.patch, trac_1956_uni_multi_ps_3.patch,
 archive/issue_comments_009193.json:
 ```json
 {
-    "body": "<div id=\"comment:96\" align=\"right\">comment:96</div>\n\nFirst, thanks for all your work Niles, what you've done has already saved me hours of pain!\n\nThere seems to be a problem with how coercion/evaluation works between two multivariate power series rings when the number of variables in each differs.  For example:\n\n```\nsage: A.<a, b, c> = PowerSeriesRing(QQ)\nsage: B.<s, t> = PowerSeriesRing(QQ)\nsage: s(a, b)\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------\nTypeError                                 Traceback (most recent call last)\n\n/home/hlaw/Dropbox/org/<ipython console> in <module>()\n\n/home/hlaw/src/sage-src/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/rings/multi_power_series_ring_element.pyc in __call__(self, *x, **kwds)\n    419         for i in range(len(x)):\n    420             try:\n--> 421                  xi = self.parent(x[i])\n    422             except AttributeError:\n    423                 raise AttributeError(str(x[i])+\" does not coerce to parent ring.\")\n\n/home/hlaw/src/sage-src/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/structure/element.so in sage.structure.element.Element.parent (sage/structure/element.c:4069)()\n\n/home/hlaw/src/sage-src/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/rings/power_series_ring.pyc in __call__(self, f, prec, check)\n    604             v = sage_eval(f.Eltseq())\n    605             return self(v) * (self.gen(0)**f.Valuation())\n--> 606         return self.__power_series_class(self, f, prec, check=check)\n    607         \n    608     def construction(self):\n\n/home/hlaw/src/sage-src/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/rings/multi_power_series_ring_element.pyc in __init__(self, parent, x, prec, is_gen, check)\n    352                     self._bg_value = parent._bg_ps_ring(x._bg_value)\n    353                 except TypeError:\n--> 354                     raise TypeError(\"Unable to coerce into background ring.\")\n    355                 \n    356             elif xparent == parent._bg_ps_ring():\n\nTypeError: Unable to coerce into background ring.\n```\nI would expect this to print `a`.  Similar permutations with `s^2`, `s + t`, etc. produce the same result.\n\nAnother problem, possibly related, is the following:\n\n```\nsage: B.<s, t> = PowerSeriesRing(QQ)\nsage: C.<z> = PowerSeriesRing(QQ)\nsage: s(z, z)  # expect z\n1\nsage: s(z, z^2)  # expect z\n1\nsage: s(0, z^2)  # expect 0\n0\nsage: s(z^2, 0)  # expect z^2\n1\nsage: (2*s^2)(z, z)  # expect 2*z^2\n2\nsage: (2*s^2 + 3*t)(z, z)  # expect 3*z + 2*z^2\n5\nsage: t(0, z)  # expect z\n1\nsage: t(z, z)  # expect z\n1\nsage: z(s + t) # expect s + t\ns + t\nsage: z(s)  # expect s\ns\nsage: z(t)  # expect t\nt\n```\nClearly `z` is being sent to 1 (one) somehow when going from `QQ[This is the Trac macro *s,t* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#s,t-macro)` to `QQ[This is the Trac macro *z* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#z-macro)`, but the maps in the other direction work fine.\n\nBoth of these problems (assuming they're distinct) disappear when one does the analogous calculations directly with multivariate *polynomial* rings.\n\nCheers, Hamish.\n\n(Using Sage 4.6.2 +power series patches, on Ubuntu 10.10 64bit, Macbook 5.1.)",
+    "body": "<div id=\"comment:96\" align=\"right\">comment:96</div>\n\nFirst, thanks for all your work Niles, what you've done has already saved me hours of pain!\n\nThere seems to be a problem with how coercion/evaluation works between two multivariate power series rings when the number of variables in each differs.  For example:\n\n```\nsage: A.<a, b, c> = PowerSeriesRing(QQ)\nsage: B.<s, t> = PowerSeriesRing(QQ)\nsage: s(a, b)\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------\nTypeError                                 Traceback (most recent call last)\n\n/home/hlaw/Dropbox/org/<ipython console> in <module>()\n\n/home/hlaw/src/sage-src/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/rings/multi_power_series_ring_element.pyc in __call__(self, *x, **kwds)\n    419         for i in range(len(x)):\n    420             try:\n--> 421                  xi = self.parent(x[i])\n    422             except AttributeError:\n    423                 raise AttributeError(str(x[i])+\" does not coerce to parent ring.\")\n\n/home/hlaw/src/sage-src/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/structure/element.so in sage.structure.element.Element.parent (sage/structure/element.c:4069)()\n\n/home/hlaw/src/sage-src/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/rings/power_series_ring.pyc in __call__(self, f, prec, check)\n    604             v = sage_eval(f.Eltseq())\n    605             return self(v) * (self.gen(0)**f.Valuation())\n--> 606         return self.__power_series_class(self, f, prec, check=check)\n    607         \n    608     def construction(self):\n\n/home/hlaw/src/sage-src/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/rings/multi_power_series_ring_element.pyc in __init__(self, parent, x, prec, is_gen, check)\n    352                     self._bg_value = parent._bg_ps_ring(x._bg_value)\n    353                 except TypeError:\n--> 354                     raise TypeError(\"Unable to coerce into background ring.\")\n    355                 \n    356             elif xparent == parent._bg_ps_ring():\n\nTypeError: Unable to coerce into background ring.\n```\nI would expect this to print `a`.  Similar permutations with `s^2`, `s + t`, etc. produce the same result.\n\nAnother problem, possibly related, is the following:\n\n```\nsage: B.<s, t> = PowerSeriesRing(QQ)\nsage: C.<z> = PowerSeriesRing(QQ)\nsage: s(z, z)  # expect z\n1\nsage: s(z, z^2)  # expect z\n1\nsage: s(0, z^2)  # expect 0\n0\nsage: s(z^2, 0)  # expect z^2\n1\nsage: (2*s^2)(z, z)  # expect 2*z^2\n2\nsage: (2*s^2 + 3*t)(z, z)  # expect 3*z + 2*z^2\n5\nsage: t(0, z)  # expect z\n1\nsage: t(z, z)  # expect z\n1\nsage: z(s + t) # expect s + t\ns + t\nsage: z(s)  # expect s\ns\nsage: z(t)  # expect t\nt\n```\nClearly `z` is being sent to 1 (one) somehow when going from `QQ[[s,t]]` to `QQ[[z]]`, but the maps in the other direction work fine.\n\nBoth of these problems (assuming they're distinct) disappear when one does the analogous calculations directly with multivariate *polynomial* rings.\n\nCheers, Hamish.\n\n(Using Sage 4.6.2 +power series patches, on Ubuntu 10.10 64bit, Macbook 5.1.)",
     "created_at": "2011-03-22T18:26:25Z",
     "formatter": "markdown",
     "issue": "https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/1956",
@@ -5819,7 +5819,7 @@ s
 sage: z(t)  # expect t
 t
 ```
-Clearly `z` is being sent to 1 (one) somehow when going from `QQ[This is the Trac macro *s,t* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#s,t-macro)` to `QQ[This is the Trac macro *z* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#z-macro)`, but the maps in the other direction work fine.
+Clearly `z` is being sent to 1 (one) somehow when going from `QQ[[s,t]]` to `QQ[[z]]`, but the maps in the other direction work fine.
 
 Both of these problems (assuming they're distinct) disappear when one does the analogous calculations directly with multivariate *polynomial* rings.
 

Issues-02xxx/2138.md

@@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ William
 archive/issue_comments_010365.json:
 ```json
 {
-    "body": "Description changed:\n``````diff\n--- \n+++ \n@@ -1,10 +1,11 @@\n+\n+```\n sage: G = AbelianGroup(2,[2,3], names=\"xy\")\n sage: x,y = G.gens()\n sage: x.word_problem([x,y],display=False)\n-[This is the Trac macro *x, 1* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#x, 1-macro)\n+[[x, 1]]\n sage: x.word_problem([x,y],display=True)\n-\n----\n+---------------------------------------------------------------------------\n <type 'exceptions.NameError'>             Traceback (most recent call last)\n \n /mnt/drive_hda1/sagefiles/sage-2.9.alpha4/<ipython console> in <module>()\n@@ -18,7 +19,6 @@\n \n <type 'exceptions.NameError'>: global name 'add' is not defined\n \n+```\n+This is obviously a problem. Also, the docstring should be written better. The first example is hard to understand.\n \n-This is obviously a problem. Also, the docstring should be written better. The first\n-example is hard to understand.\n-\n``````\n",
+    "body": "Description changed:\n``````diff\n--- \n+++ \n@@ -1,10 +1,11 @@\n+\n+```\n sage: G = AbelianGroup(2,[2,3], names=\"xy\")\n sage: x,y = G.gens()\n sage: x.word_problem([x,y],display=False)\n [[x, 1]]\n sage: x.word_problem([x,y],display=True)\n-\n----\n+---------------------------------------------------------------------------\n <type 'exceptions.NameError'>             Traceback (most recent call last)\n \n /mnt/drive_hda1/sagefiles/sage-2.9.alpha4/<ipython console> in <module>()\n@@ -18,7 +19,6 @@\n \n <type 'exceptions.NameError'>: global name 'add' is not defined\n \n+```\n+This is obviously a problem. Also, the docstring should be written better. The first example is hard to understand.\n \n-This is obviously a problem. Also, the docstring should be written better. The first\n-example is hard to understand.\n-\n``````\n",
     "created_at": "2008-04-09T04:21:15Z",
     "formatter": "markdown",
     "issue": "https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/2138",
@@ -204,8 +204,7 @@ Description changed:
  sage: G = AbelianGroup(2,[2,3], names="xy")
  sage: x,y = G.gens()
  sage: x.word_problem([x,y],display=False)
--[This is the Trac macro *x, 1* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#x, 1-macro)
-+[[x, 1]]
+ [[x, 1]]
  sage: x.word_problem([x,y],display=True)
 -
 ----

Issues-02xxx/2419.md

@@ -510,7 +510,7 @@ Do you have any idea how the problem was fixed (or whom i should ask)?
 archive/issue_comments_012189.json:
 ```json
 {
-    "body": "<div id=\"comment:9\" align=\"right\">comment:9</div>\n\nReplying to [@williamstein](#comment%3A8):\n> perhaps you noticed that i had found a version of the weird bug\n> \"resultant+gap+singular=nonsense\" even on sage.math, as i reported in\n> ticket #2419.\n> \n> That was for sage-2.10.2; but the problem has vanished for sage-2.10.3 --\n> at least on sage.math, i am curious what will happen on my machine. [This is the Trac macro *it survives there* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#it survives there-macro)\n> \n> Do you have any idea how the problem was fixed (or whom i should ask)?\n\nThat was my message off trac to William. Apparently i was too optimistic: What i posted above *did* (and still does) happen on sage.math *after* writing my message to William. \n\nHopefully it is reproducible for you.",
+    "body": "<div id=\"comment:9\" align=\"right\">comment:9</div>\n\nReplying to [@williamstein](#comment%3A8):\n> perhaps you noticed that i had found a version of the weird bug\n> \"resultant+gap+singular=nonsense\" even on sage.math, as i reported in\n> ticket #2419.\n> \n> That was for sage-2.10.2; but the problem has vanished for sage-2.10.3 --\n> at least on sage.math, i am curious what will happen on my machine. [[it survives there]]\n> \n> Do you have any idea how the problem was fixed (or whom i should ask)?\n\nThat was my message off trac to William. Apparently i was too optimistic: What i posted above *did* (and still does) happen on sage.math *after* writing my message to William. \n\nHopefully it is reproducible for you.",
     "created_at": "2008-03-12T15:15:57Z",
     "formatter": "markdown",
     "issue": "https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/2419",
@@ -528,7 +528,7 @@ Replying to [@williamstein](#comment%3A8):
 > ticket #2419.
 > 
 > That was for sage-2.10.2; but the problem has vanished for sage-2.10.3 --
-> at least on sage.math, i am curious what will happen on my machine. [This is the Trac macro *it survives there* that was inherited from the migration](https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/WikiMacros#it survives there-macro)
+> at least on sage.math, i am curious what will happen on my machine. [[it survives there]]
 > 
 > Do you have any idea how the problem was fixed (or whom i should ask)?