Re: choice of character for relational division

From: Bruce C. Baker <bcbakerXX_at_cox.net>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 18:46:41 -0500
Message-ID: <gvXPh.5712$EJ6.1632@newsfe24.lga>

"Marshall" <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:1175468445.659304.173050_at_b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 1, 3:00 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>> David Cressey wrote:
>>
>> > > ... all the good operators have been taken!
>>
>> > I'm just picking up on this now. Did the author mean "all the good
>> > symbols
>> > have been taken" instead of "all the good operators have been taken"?
>>
>> Operators are symbols by definition. He didn't say that all the good
>> operations have been taken.
>
> All the good nonalphabetic symbols used to represent functions
> typically via infix notation but sometimes for prefix or suffix
> have been previously owned?

Uhhhh, right. What Marshall said! ;-)

>
>
> Marshall
>
> PS. But are protected by our extended warranty?
>
Received on Sun Apr 01 2007 - 18:46:41 CDT