A familiar example could be an 'impactedBy' relation defined as the reflexive, transitive closure of the 'dependsOn' relation since a bundle, for example, is obviously impacted by changing the things it depends on (transitively ;-) ) as well as by changing the bundle itself.
Glyn
On 08/09/06, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 08 September 2006 16:07, Glyn Normington wrote:
Cool!!
I am surprised I could follow that entire reasoning without much problem...
> Lastly, a relation R is reflexive if for each element x it deals with (I'll
> spare you the mathematical terms), x R x. You can take any binary relation
> R and define another relation from the transitive closure of R together
> with all the relationships x R x and you get a reflexive transitive
> relation which is called, unsurprisingly, the "reflexive transitive
> closure" of R.
However, this part _I_ don't understand. Not even a bit ;o)
One part is the formal definition, but how about something in real world that
makes sense? Would it be like (Niclas nuisanceOf Niclas) ? If so, does this
contribute any in our space?
Cheers
Niclas
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
_______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
