On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 03:08:51PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Dylan Thurston wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 08:16:59PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
O(n)
which should be O(\n - n) (a remark by Simon Thompson in
The Craft of
(Resurrecting a somewhat old thread...)
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 08:16:59PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005, Chung-chieh Shan wrote:
But I would hesitate with some of your examples, because they may simply
illustrate that mathematical notation is a language with side
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 08:16:59PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
But what do you mean with 1/O(n^2) ? O(f) is defined as the set of
functions bounded to the upper by f. So 1/O(f) has no meaning at the
first glance. I could interpret it as lifting (1/) to (\f x - 1 / f x)
(i.e. lifting from
(Is Lemming the same person as Henning Thielemann?)
On 2005-01-30T21:24:24+0100, Lemming wrote:
Chung-chieh Shan wrote:
Wait a minute -- would you also say that 1+x has no meaning at the
first glance, because x is a variable whereas 1 is an integer, so
some lifting is called for?
For me
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Chung-chieh Shan wrote:
(Is Lemming the same person as Henning Thielemann?)
Yes. :-)
For the expression '1+x' I
conclude by type inference that 'x' must be a variable for a scalar
value, since '1' is, too. But the expression '1/O(n^2)' has the scalar
value '1'
Chung-chieh Shan wrote:
On 2005-01-28T20:16:59+0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
I can't imagine mathematics with side effects, because there is no order
of execution.
To clarify, I'm not saying that mathematics may have side effects, but
that the language we use to talk about mathematics may have
a b c
which is a short-cut of a b \land b c
The confusion between f(x) and x.f(x) is indeed a real bummer.
OTOH I like the abc shorthand because it's both obvious and unambiguous
(as long as the return value of can't be passed as an argument to , which
is typically the case when the
Stefan Monnier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OTOH I like the abc shorthand because it's both obvious and
unambiguous (as long as the return value of can't be passed as an
argument to , which is typically the case when the return value is
boolean and there's no ordering defined on booleans).
On 2005-01-29, Stefan Monnier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a b c
which is a short-cut of a b \land b c
The confusion between f(x) and ?x.f(x) is indeed a real bummer.
OTOH I like the abc shorthand because it's both obvious and unambiguous
(as long as the return value of can't be passed
Henning Thielemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in article [EMAIL PROTECTED] in
gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cafe:
Over the past years I became more and more aware that common mathematical
notation is full of inaccuracies, abuses and stupidity. I wonder if
mathematical notation is subject of a
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005, Chung-chieh Shan wrote:
Henning Thielemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cafe:
Over the past years I became more and more aware that common mathematical
notation is full of inaccuracies, abuses and stupidity. I wonder
On 2005-01-28T20:16:59+0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005, Chung-chieh Shan wrote:
But I would hesitate with some of your examples, because they may simply
illustrate that mathematical notation is a language with side effects --
see the third and fifth examples below.
I
Chung-chieh Shan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
O(n)
which should be O(\n - n) (a remark by Simon Thompson in
The Craft of Functional Programming)
It's a neat thought, IMHO. I usually try to quantify the variables
used, making the equivalent of 'let n = .. in
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 08:16:59PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
But what do you mean with 1/O(n^2) ? O(f) is defined as the set of
functions bounded to the upper by f. So 1/O(f) has no meaning at the
first glance. I could interpret it as lifting (1/) to (\f x - 1 / f x)
(i.e. lifting from
14 matches
Mail list logo
