>> Z is also a ring without one, i.e., Ring should inherit from Rng. > > Definitely. And this is the case. > >> I would rather say that Rng is a "ring" that *doesn't claim* the >> existence of 1. > > Yup, it's like non-associative rings of which rings are a special case. > Now, I need a better name than RingsThatDoNotClaimExistenceOfOne().
Although, when I first saw Rng in Axiom, I didn't understand why the programmers used something that looked like an abbreviation. But, in fact, I somehow like that name. It makes it pretty obvious that the 'identity' is somehow hidden or non-existent. If you don't like Rng, then what about PseudoRing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo-ring But actually, Rng looks more intuitive. Is clear enough (or even clearer), and shorter than PseudoRing ;-). But it seems that also PseudoRing is quite a good name. And I am sure you have also found the following for Rig. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-ring Compare also http://books.google.at/books?id=roEx6lkAp10C&dq=Jonathan+S.+Golan,+Semirings+and+their+applications&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=jI4yTSEBOZ&sig=CgCZ_07yz0qI_EUTLs2NAChAVYw&hl=de&ei=n_gcSqnSF4yHsAaQyOzQCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1 Chapter one. Looks like a Semiring/Rig is *not* what you originally described as >>> - Rig: Ring without 0 http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/msg/bd5d8a5ad2103c57 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
