>>> The question I was raising was about the names we wanted to use for >>> "rings" without 0 resp. 1. >> Z is also a ring without one, i.e., Ring should inherit from Rng. I > > ??? Z contained 1 last time I looked! > > John > >> would rather say that Rng is a "ring" that *doesn't claim* the existence >> of 1.
You forgot to read the line after your signature. I was speaking about inheritance Rng ==> Ring, i.e. every Ring is a Rng. Ralf --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
