Remi Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Wouldn't that be looking for a sub*string*, and not a (general) >> sub*sequence* (which I think does not have to be contigous?)
> Do you mean "subset" with "subsequence"? No, since a set isn't ordered. I would say a subset needs to contain some of the elements of the superset, a subsequence needs to contain some elements of the supersequence in the same order, and a substring (for lack of a better term) is a contigous subsequence. But I may be wrong. -kzm PS: I feel queasy about "strand", since that has a different meaning in biology (DNA consists of two strands). -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
