On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 06:07:52 -0800, David Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Dec 3, 2006, at 12:56 AM, Bobby Moretti wrote: > >> >>>> These are all good reasons... I wish there was a better way than >>>> having a predefined list of indeterminates... I could see all >>>> sorts of >>>> things being screwed up that way. >>> >>> Such as? >> >> Sorry, I was sort of thinking out loud. Wrong choice of words, and not >> what I meant to say. A set of predefined indeterminates seems like a >> pretty natural thing to have, in a mathematics software suite. We >> should just make sure to explain what's really going on to people. > > If the predefined indeterminate belongs to a ring, which ring is it? Very likely it would just be ZZ[a,b,c,d...,z, A,B,C,...,Z]. Alternatively, they could be "formal indeterminates" that don't belong to some "formal ring", but that's less easy to think about. William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
