Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 18:31:50 GMT
Bob Badour wrote:
> paul c wrote:
>> Bob Badour wrote: >> >>> paul c wrote: >> >> ... >> >>>> Since when does a predicate (ie., a conventional FOL predicate) >>>> mention a relation name? >>> >>> Usually when discussing the composition operator. f(g(x)) sort of thing. >>> >>>> (Surely relation names aren't anything but an implementation device.) >>> >>> I don't think I entirely agree. >> >> Is the mention of g(x) not equivalent to enumerating g(x)?
> No, g is just the name of the relation. Composition is usually written
> with some symbol like f*g.
Fair enough, as far as I understand what you mean. Sometimes we don't want to evaluate an expression immediately but instead save the mention of it (using some unique name we make up for it) to be used in some later calculation. For that purpose is the function name anything more than a device or convenience?
Or is there another purpose? Received on Tue Jul 08 2008 - 20:31:50 CEST