Re: rnf*

[Xavier-François Roblot <roblot@euler.univ-lyon1.fr>]

Karim BELABAS wrote:

> P.S2: The routines using the 'rnf' structure have been introduced in version
> 2.1. They are very inefficient, and probably hardly ever used (so that the
> rnfidealnorm* bugs would go undetected for more than 5 years, for instance).
> It might be a better idea to redesign them than to worry about backward
> compatibility.

I have been using some of these routines in several scripts dealing with
relative abelian extensions. I have to agree there are not so easy to
use and quite often misleading. Therefore, I do agree that a general
redesign of these functions is the best option...

Now, do you have any ideas on how to do that?

Xavier