On 24 Nov., 23:56, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > > I never use these canonical embeddings, and cannot think of a reason > > for defining one field twice in this way... > > Well, it is imaginable that some automatic constructions (say, in > pushout) create such a situation. And if it occurs, the program should > know how it is supposed to cope with it.
The reason for my question was a bug that I introduced while working at #8800. I can solve it by being more careful with the data stored in the construction functors, and also by allowing broader conversion (not coercion) between different number fields. Nevertheless, I think this case of coercion between a number field with and a number field without embedding (which direction??) should be covered. Cheers, Simon -- 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
