# Re: [isabelle] Code setup for Fraction_Field

```Hi Florian and Manuel,

```
I have experimented a bit with a normalisation function to be used in the operations over fraction fields and had a look at Euclidean_Algorithm in Number_Theory.
```
```
1. I noticed that there are the type classes euclidean_ring and euclidean_ring_gcd. Most of the theorems about gcd which I need are in euclidean_ring_gcd, but not in euclidean_ring itself. Unfortunately, the instantiations for nat, int, etc. are only done for euclidean_ring, not for euclidean_ring_gcd. What are the plans for these type classes? Should I spend any effort on adding instances for euclidean_ring_gcd? Or will this become obsolete with the polishing that is still due?
```
```
2. I am no longer sure that an invariant-based approach is the optimal thing for fraction field. In the code equation for the arithmetic operation, I don't see any big opportunities to exploit the invariant that nominator and denominator are normalised in some unspecified form. Only the equality tests become simpler (as normal forms are unique and we thus save two multiplications). Instead, it seems much simpler to treat cancellation of common factors as an optimisation without logical significance. For example, we could just add a call to a simplification function before calls to the Fract constructor. The simplification function only has to return an element of the same equivalence class, so for nat and int, we could use a normalisation function based on Euclid's algorithm. For other types, the simplification function could also just be the identity. What do you think?
```
Best,
Andreas

On 27/08/15 12:02, Florian Haftmann wrote:
```
```Hi Andreas and Prathamesh,

```
```We noticed that the code setup for the theory Fraction_Field in
HOL/Library is broken, at least since Isabelle2013. We would like to use
code generation in his formalisation of knot theory where the elements
of the fraction fields are polynomials over integers. I had a brief look
at the theory Fraction_Field and noticed that there is a smart
pseudo-constructor Fract, which is declared as code_datatype. So this
feels as if the code generation was working at some time in the distant
past and got broken somewhen.

Does anyone know about the status of Fraction_Field?
```
```
I dimly remember that initially Fraction_Field just took over the
then-used code setup from the rationals, and maybe it never worked as
intended (would need a closer investigation to find out actually).

When code generation had been equipped with invariants, I revisited
Fraction_Field to make a code setup close to the rationals but soon
realized thatâ

```
```I believe that it would be fairly easy to "fix" the problem of code
generator setup by deriving a few code equation from the lemmas, but
this will clearly result in suboptimal code for two reasons. First, we
need tests whether the denominator is 0 all over the place. Second, the
elements of the fraction fields will not be normalised automatically.
```
```
âI need a generalized gcd for that, and so I let everything stand as it is.

```
```For the application on polynomials, this means that we would need some
Euclidean algorithm for cancelling common factors of polynomials. I
dimly remember that there is some support for the Euclidean algorithm in
the pipeline. What is the status there?
```
```
I think you can build on the corresponding theory in Number_Theory, but
that needs some further rounds of polishing before I would recommend to
turn it into a ÂhardÂ dependency.  Instead I suggest to put the code
setup into a separate theory ÂExecutable_Fraction_FieldÂ.  This is what
we did 8 years ago when code generation was still highly experimentalâ

Hope this helps,
Florian

```
```
Best,
Andreas and Prathamesh

```
```
```
```

```

This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail (Mailman edition) and MHonArc.