[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [more absurd]
From: |
tomas |
Subject: |
Re: [more absurd] |
Date: |
Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:16:14 +0200 |
On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 09:42:01AM +0200, Uwe Brauer wrote:
[...]
> That is the first time I remember that on this list, questions of the
> foundation of mathematics are discussed 😉
Such things happen :)
> Back to the point, maybe I am too conservative, but I would include 0
> within the natural numbers,
If you really were, you wouldn't. Peano himself didn't ;-)
> and the example I started with, needs to
> cover that case (student marks range between 0 to 10 both included), so
> sorting should work (for me) in that case.
See? I went to school in Spain, so I know about that 0..10 scale.
But then I went to school in Germany, so I also know about the
6..1 scale. Go figure :)
> I don't see, so far any benefit for not considering 0 in that sorting
> process.
But your concrete problem isn't a sorting process at all, just a
conversion process: empty space gets translated to zero. As someone
else found out in this thread.
Cheers
--
t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: [more absurd], (continued)
- Re: [more absurd], Uwe Brauer, 2022/07/03
- Re: [more absurd], Bruno Barbier, 2022/07/03
- Re: [more absurd], Uwe Brauer, 2022/07/03
- Re: [more absurd], Bruno Barbier, 2022/07/03
- Re: [more absurd], Uwe Brauer, 2022/07/03
- Re: [more absurd], tomas, 2022/07/04
- Re: [more absurd], Uwe Brauer, 2022/07/04
- Re: [more absurd], tomas, 2022/07/04
- Re: [more absurd], Martin Steffen, 2022/07/04
- Re: [more absurd], Uwe Brauer, 2022/07/04
- Re: [more absurd],
tomas <=
- Re: [more absurd], Uwe Brauer, 2022/07/04
- Re: [more absurd], tomas, 2022/07/04
- Re: [more absurd], Martin Steffen, 2022/07/04