Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrenced...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 2:56:24 PM UTC+13, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> >> Lawrence D’Oliveiro writes: >> >>> On Wednesday, March 14, 2018 at 2:18:24 PM UTC+13, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>> >>>> Lawrence D’Oliveiro writes: >>>> >>>> The original problem -- triples of natural numbers -- is >>>> not particularly hard, but the general problem -- enumerating n-tuples >>>> of some sequence -- is more interesting because it is a bit harder. >>> >>> It’s not harder--it’s exactly the same difficulty. You iterate the >>> naturals, then interpose a function mapping them onto the set that you >>> really want to use. >> >> Yes, I said exactly that a couple of messages ago. > > I see. So you said it is a bit harder, and you also said it’s not > harder at all. Got it.
Yes, I was not clear. It was the point about mapping from a solution that uses the natural numbers that's I mentioned before. The "bit harder" comes from generalising to n-tuples. (I get the feeling I should apologise for something because I think I have annoyed or irritated you. I'm sure I don't always get the right tone but I really hope I've not been rude. I'm sorry if I have been.) -- Ben. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
