On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Achim Schneider <bars...@web.de> wrote:
> Steve <stevech1...@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > > > "It is useful to define gcd(0, 0) = 0 and lcm(0, 0) = 0 because then > > the natural numbers become a complete distributive lattice with gcd > > as meet and lcm as join operation. This extension of the definition > > is also compatible with the generalization for commutative rings > > given below." > > > Ouch. Speak of mathematicians annoying programmers by claiming that 0 > isn't divisible by any of [1..], and further implying that 0 is bigger > than all of those, not to mention justifying all that with long words. > > Damn them buggers. 0 is divisible by everything. It's "bigger" than all of them with respect to divisibility, not size. Which you may have known. Your irony was too complex for me :-p Lukk
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
