On Monday 22 August 2016 at 15:04:49, Marc Perkel wrote:
> I'm confused by the confusion here.
>
> Set A - a finite set - has some members,
> Set B - and infinite set - is everything that is NOT in Set A
>
> So you match a test item to Set A and if it matches it's a member of A.
> If it doesn't match Set A it's a member of B.
>
> How is this not really simple?
Because "everything that is NOT in Set A" means some surprisingly complicated
things to some people, and which I believe for the purposes of your spam
identifier are irrelevant.
It might keep the pedants happier if you were to identify the sets as:
Set A contains some email tokens.
Set B contains all possible email tokens which are not in Set A.
This then precludes the possibility that Set B might contain itself, since a
set is not a plausible email token.
Antony.
--
I just got a new mobile phone, and I called it Titanic. It's already syncing.
Please reply to the list;
please *don't* CC me.
