Re: [boost] powerset

From: Chuck Allison (cda_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-29 12:55:49

Gee, you can also say it's a really SUPER SET!

By the way, people didn't seem to have a problem hijacking "functor" from
mathematics either; only we mathematicians wince :-).

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Bergman" <davidb_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 11:37 AM
Subject: RE: [boost] powerset

> Victor,
>
> I really hope everyone here knows what a (mathematical) powerset is...
> But, one could always argue for the "hip" interpretation of "powerset"
> as in "mighty POWERful SET abstraction" ;-)
>
> The good ol' cardinality jumper, P(s)...
>
> /David
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Victor A. Wagner,
> Jr.
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 3:33 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] powerset
>
>
> At Wednesday 2002/08/28 12:41, you wrote:
> >On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Dave Gomboc wrote:
> >
> > > > >If all the elements of the set are known at compile time, why do
> > > > >you need to store the bits at all? Your class can encode the
> > > > >information in its type, thus, your class can consume zero bytes.
> > > >
> > > > right up until you need to add (or subtract) something that isn't
> > > > knows until runtime.
> > >
> > > ...which doesn't always happen.  There are certainly things I could
> > > use it for at compile-time, rather than my existing practice of
> > > generating a header file containing an array of magic numbers with
> > > an external program.
> > >
> > > Back to naming: this new proposed set is no more discrete than the
> > > STL's set, so "discrete_set" is a misnomer.  I think that the best
> > > name I've heard so far here for it (other than "set", which is taken
>
> > > :-) is "powerset".  Was there something wrong with that suggestion?
> > >
> >
> >Hello,
> >
> >Nothing personal but this reference to powerset causes me to cringe as
> >inconsistent with the accepted definition of "power set."
>
> you'll provide us a definition that is "accepted" right??  Apparently
> the
> one following isn't.
>
> I'm quoting here from "CRC Concise Encyclopedia of Mathematics" Power
> Set Given a SET S, the POWER SET of S is the SET of all SUBSETS of S.
> The
> order of a POWER set of a SET of an order n is 2^n.  Power sets are
> larger
> than the sets associated with them.
>
>
> >There's a large body of mathematical terminology (and mathematics
> >itself) borrowed and integrated into CS.  Can we please try to be
> >consistent and non-contradictory in language in order to avoid
> >unnecessary confusion?
> >
> >I don't read this list as carefully as I would like, so apologies for
> >butting in here.  In the future I'll try to follow these threads more
> >carefully.
> >
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >Kathy Gerber
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Also (albeit without having put much thought into it) it seems to me
>
> > > that there ought to be a lot of overlap with bitset/dyn_bitset/etc.
>
> > > Can all of these be rolled into one somehow?
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Unsubscribe & other changes:
> > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
> > >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Unsubscribe & other changes:
> >http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
> Victor A. Wagner Jr.      http://rudbek.com
> PGP RSA fingerprint = 4D20 EBF6 0101 B069 3817 8DBF C846 E47A PGP D-H
> fingerprint = 98BC 65E3 1A19 43EC 3908 65B9 F755 E6F4 63BB 9D93 The five
> most dangerous words in the English language:
>                "There oughta be a law"
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>