On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Nils Bruin <nbr...@sfu.ca> wrote: > On Nov 26, 1:03 pm, Christian Stump <christian.st...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Can you be a little more specific here? How would you want the >> embedding being defined using an extra argument? > > Perhaps ....(embedding = emb) > > where emb is an indexable object such that emb[i] yields the image of > zeta[i] ? > Of course, it is possible to give inconsistent data, but that's also > the case with CyclotomicField. > > Alternatively, emb could be a callable that returns the same thing. > However that might be a little confusing, since specifying emb as an > element of, say Hom(UCF,CC) would also seem reasonable, but emb(2) > would mean different things in the different contexts.
Good point. The options would then be None/False (=no embedding), True (standard embedding), or any indexable. - Robert -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
