Re: Grammatical Inconsistencies
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 14:50:46 -0500
Thanks for enlightening me EVEN THOUGH you said you would filter me out.
Are you willing to bother showing me an example of the use of a join within
the relational theory framework where it is not the same as the
cross-product -- or pointing me to some such example? I suppose I'm pushing
my luck, eh?
Timothy J. Bruce" <uniblab_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> [I'm going to hate myself in the morning for this...]
> The cartesian product of any number of sets defines a RELATION.
> The intersection, union, and symetric difference of any number of sets
> defines a SET.
> Patrick Suppes: ``Introduction to Logic'', Van Norstrand Company, Inc
> (August 1968)
> Ralph P. Grimaldi: ``Discrete and Combinatorial Mathematics'',
> Reading-Mass.: Addison-Wesley (1985)
> Larry J. Goldstein, David I. Schneider, Martha J. Siegel: ``Finite
> Mathematics And Its Applications'', Prentice-Hall, Inc (1995)
> Kolman, Bubsy, Ross: ``Discrete Mathematical Structures'', Prentice-Hall
> Donald E. Knuth: ``The Art of Computer Programming: Volume 1: Fundamental
> Algorithms (third edition)'', Addison-Wesley (1997)
> Donald E. Knuth: ``The Art of Computer Programming: Volume 3: Sorting and
> Searching (second edition)'', Addison-Wesley (1998)
> But what would Knuth know since he isn't a ``relational guy'',
> Timothy J. Bruce
Received on Thu Apr 22 2004 - 21:50:46 CEST