NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
an endless discussion thread about what features to include.
-- Jarkko Hietaniemi
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
I don't grok the syntax (Score:2)
OK, I'm at a loss here. Naturals don't form a ring because they lack the number zero? Is that right? If so, that seems straightforward enough. However, I don't know what you mean when you wrote that even though Naturals are rings, you seem to have proven they are. I certainly don't know what that means in relation to the code you posted.
Taking a guess, it seems what you're saying is that for a given set S which satisfies condition C, no arbitrary subset of S is necessarily guaranteed to satisfy C but
Re:I don't grok the syntax (Score:1)
> number zero?
This is somewhat beside the point, but that is one reason, yes. The other reason is that there are elements (namely, all of them
> Taking a guess, it seems what you're saying is
> that for a given set S which satisfies condition
> C, no arbitrary subset of S is necessarily
> guaranteed to satisfy C but you've accidentally
> implied that in your theory.
Precisely. It turns out that that's h