|
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Re: To be or not to be...
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg62055] Re: [mg62032] Re: To be or not to be...
- From: Pratik Desai <pdesai1 at umbc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 02:50:38 -0500 (EST)
- References: <dksd37$h58$1@smc.vnet.net> <200511091005.FAA19735@smc.vnet.net>
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
dh wrote:
>Hi Ingolf,
>the problem is not with Sequence, but with Equal and its brethren.
>Sequence will simply insert an empty list into these functions.
>We then have:
>
>Equal[]
>Unequal[]
>SameQ[]
>UnsameQ[]
>
>the amazing fact is that all these are giving True.
>
>The closet thing one finds in the Help is:
>
>"Equal[e] gives True."
>
>and similar for the other functions.
>Here e means an expression. To make ends meet, one has to assume that
>"expression" in this context" can also mean "nothing" or no arguments.
>
>
One the other hand an empty set in not the same as nothing, e.g. look
at wikepedia's explanation of empty set
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_set
Or maybe I am missing something......won't be the first time :-)
>The amazing thing here is, that in general, a pattern of f[x_] does not
>fit f[]. Why should Equal be an exception???
>
>sincerely, Daniel
>
>Ingolf Dahl wrote:
>
>
>>To Mathgroup,
>>
>>Try the following commands in order:
>>
>>b = Sequence[]
>>
>>b == Sequence[]
>>
>>b != Sequence[]
>>
>>b === Sequence[]
>>
>>b =!= Sequence[]
>>
>>The four last lines all evaluate to "True" for me. Quite amazing!
>>
>>Best regards
>>
>>Ingolf Dahl
>>
>>Sweden
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Pratik Desai
Graduate Student
UMBC
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Phone: 410 455 8134
Prev by Date:
Re: Timing runs for the last part of my previous post
Next by Date:
Re: ((a&&b)||c)==((a||c)&&(b||c))
Previous by thread:
Re: To be or not to be...
Next by thread:
Re: To be or not to be...
|