Singular

for what its worth I built this and have it working for me.

Dima Pasechnik's account is currently inactive. Therefore he asked me to link this thread to the corresponding github issue: [url]https://github.com/Singular/Sources/issues/881[/url].

Hi Hannes,

[quote="hannes"]vectors of bintint are already there:
[code]bigintmat m[1][3]=1,2,3;
[/code]
[/quote]
I see. The syntax is different than for a vector, so, it isn't truly a vector of bigints, but at least it would be a work around.

[quote]
Using bigintmat as return type of hilb does not help;
the overflow occurs during the computation of the Hilbert function,
[/quote]
Sure.
[quote]
changing that requires a complete rewrite of the code,
if you volonteer for that you are welcome.
[/quote]
Seriously? Of course I don't know the code yet, but I'd be very surprised if the changes go beyond changing data types (internally of course, not just the return type) by search-and-replace.

[quote]
Changing int to long on 64bit machines is a bad idea:
- it does not help the overflow problem (see above)
- 32bit and 64bit version should behave the same way[/quote]

If I understand correctly, 32bit machines became rare, and so there is some point in arguing that using the capabilities of a 64bit machine should be standard. And even 32bit machines can emulate 64bit ints. It would of course be slower than on a 64bit machine, but it would be the lesser of two evils, IMHO.

I believe that a CAS shouldn't impose an artificial restriction that is motivated by outdated hardware and makes it fail in real-world-applications (by which I mean rings that arise in the study of modular group cohomology). I do no volunteer to change Singular so that "int" means "64bit integers" and "bigint" means "arbitrary size integers", but I think sooner or later it would be needed.

Best regards,
Simon

vectors of bintint are already there:
[code]bigintmat m[1][3]=1,2,3;
[/code]

Using bigintmat as return type of hilb does not help;
the overflow occurs during the computation of the Hilbert function,
changing that requires a complete rewrite of the code,
if you volonteer for that you are welcome.

Changing int to long on 64bit machines is a bad idea:
- it does not help the overflow problem (see above)
- 32bit and 64bit version should behave the same way

Hi!

Since the following was buried in a different larger topic, I create a new small one.

There is int and there is intvec. There is bigint, but there is no bigintvec.

- Would you consider to implement vectors of big integers in Singular?
- And would you consider to use bigint vectors [i][b]or another suitable data type[/b][/i] as return value for the hilb function? In my applications, I have rings with many variables (>70), which currently makes hilb(id,1) fail with an int overflow.

Best regards,
Simon