On Mar 18, 11:47 am, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote:
> John H Palmieri wrote:
> > On Mar 18, 1:53 am, Martin Albrecht <m...@informatik.uni-bremen.de>
> > wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 17 March 2009, William Stein wrote:
>
> > In response to William, I think \QQbar makes sense, but I'm not sure
> > about CDF: Carl had good questions about it, and besides, it's not
> > standard mathematical notation. I don't know which other ones from
> > rings/all.py you had in mind.
>
> >> How about e.g. \GF{p,n} and \GF{p} I use those a lot.
>
> >> Martin
>
> > We could have \GF, and then you could do \GF(p) and \GF(p^n), but how
> > should GF be typeset? If it's something like
>
> > \DeclareMathOperator{\GF}{GF}
>
> > then a macro makes sense. If it's essentially indistinguishable from
> > 'GF' in math mode, then I say we don't include it. What did you have
> > in mind?
>
> I believe I've seen it as $\mathbb{F}_{p}$ or $\mathbb{F}_{p^n}$ lots of
> times.
I was wondering about that option, too. That would be fine with me,
although it would require people to type \GF{p} instead of \GF(p). It
would like 'GF{p}' in interactive help, which is readable enough.
John
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
