yes, i agree with bigyan..
U can better refer, hopcroft ullman text book (a standard book for automata
theory)
If the Input alphabet do not contain { є }, then
' * ' is known as Closure Operation ==> R* = {є, R, RR, RRR,..}
' + ' is known as Transitive Closure Operation ==> R
RR* = R* only when R contains a null string.
else, RR* = R+
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Algorithm Geeks" group.
To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe fr
RR*=R+ and not R* .follow some standard textbooksothers may have
many typo errors
On 3/27/07, Ravi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> The text books on regular expressions show that:
> RR*=R*
>
> What I feel is that
> RR*=R(є + R + R^2 + R^3 ... )
>=R + R^2 + R^3 + R^4 ...
>
RR* = R* iff R containts epsilon (empty string).
On Mar 27, 1:00 pm, "Shashi Kant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> which book ??
>
> On 3/27/07, Dhruva Sagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > But it is used in books about automata...I am not agreeing to it being a
> > valid assumption anyways
which book ??
On 3/27/07, Dhruva Sagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But it is used in books about automata...I am not agreeing to it being a
> valid assumption anyways.
>
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
But it is used in books about automata...I am not agreeing to it being a
valid assumption anyways.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Algorithm Geeks" group.
To post to this group, send email to algogeek
Yes, RR* = R+ is fine.
On 3/27/07, Karthik Singaram L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> sorry
> RR* = R+ is the valid assumption
>
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Algorithm Geeks" group.
To post
Don't think such an assumption can be used.
Its not possible for RR* == R*.
On 3/27/07, Dhruva Sagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> RR*=R* is an assumption that is often made for conveniences in some books.
> I don't quite beleive it to be correct either.
>
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~
RR* is RR+ is the valid assumption
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Algorithm Geeks" group.
To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email t
sorry
RR* = R+ is the valid assumption
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Algorithm Geeks" group.
To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send ema
RR*=R* is an assumption that is often made for conveniences in some books.
I don't quite beleive it to be correct either.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Algorithm Geeks" group.
To post to this group,
11 matches
Mail list logo
