On Jul 6, 1:45 am, John Cremona <john.crem...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think it is too much to expect general PIDs to have unique > (canonical) echelon forms,
Thanks for the reply, John. As I suspected, I guess. This is now http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11579 which I do not plan to pursue, though there is one suggestion there for a fix. I solved my less tangential problem (surjectivity of free module morphisms) with a call to .is_submodule(). Rob -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
