Thanks!
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:41 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Evan Aad wrote:
> > I don't see how, since the L(B*)'s are listed in order in the argument
> > list: L(B1), L(B2), ..., and each L(B*) starts with B*: L(B1) = > ...>, L(B2) = , ...
> >
> > Could you
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Evan Aad wrote:
> I don't see how, since the L(B*)'s are listed in order in the argument
> list: L(B1), L(B2), ..., and each L(B*) starts with B*: L(B1) = ...>, L(B2) = , ...
>
> Could you please give a counter-example?
Sure.
merge(, ) ->
vs:
merge(, , )
I don't see how, since the L(B*)'s are listed in order in the argument
list: L(B1), L(B2), ..., and each L(B*) starts with B*: L(B1) = , L(B2) = , ...
Could you please give a counter-example?
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:44 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Evan Aad wrote:
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Evan Aad wrote:
> According to the description of Python's method resolution order (mro)
> (https://www.python.org/download/releases/2.3/mro/), a.k.a. C3
> linearization (see Wikipedia), the algorithm can be described as
> follows:
>
> "the linearization of C is th
According to the description of Python's method resolution order (mro)
(https://www.python.org/download/releases/2.3/mro/), a.k.a. C3
linearization (see Wikipedia), the algorithm can be described as
follows:
"the linearization of C is the sum of C plus the merge of the
linearizations of the parent
