Re: vectorization (union and intersection operators)

2002-11-04 Thread Damian Conway
Ed Peschko asked: ps - as an aside, are the apocalypses going to be backdated as changes to the design come up? Yes. Or are the apocalypses just a first draft for more enduring documentation? Yes. ;-) Damian

Re: vectorization (union and intersection operators)

2002-11-04 Thread Ed Peschko
> I'm probably opening up a whole new can of worms here, but if we said > that the following were both vector operators: > > ^ == intersection operator > v == union operator > > then these could have potentially useful meanings on their *own* as set > operators, as well as modifying oth

Re: vectorization (union and intersection operators)

2002-11-02 Thread Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Ed Peschko wrote: > I'm probably opening up a whole new can of worms here, but if we said > that the following were both vector operators: > > ^ == intersection operator > v == union operator > > then these could have potentially useful meanings on their *own* as se

vectorization (union and intersection operators)

2002-11-01 Thread Ed Peschko
I'm probably opening up a whole new can of worms here, but if we said that the following were both vector operators: ^ == intersection operator v == union operator then these could have potentially useful meanings on their *own* as set operators, as well as modifying other operat