On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 6:17:41 PM UTC+9, John Cremona wrote: > > On 9 November 2017 at 00:50, Kwankyu Lee <ekwa...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > From a discussion last year, I know that creation of finite fields with > > generator names is different from without generator names. But still the > > following is counter-intuitive. > > > > sage: k=GF(4) > > sage: K=k.extension(3, name='a') > > sage: k.is_subring(K) > > False > > sage: L=k.extension(3) > > sage: k.is_subring(L) > > True > > > > Could this behavior be still justified? > > Not in my view, >
An obvious solution is that an embedding of k into K is registered as a coercion map before the extension field is returned. I will investigate if this is not difficult. Kwankyu -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
