Re: Union of sets (lists
Re: Union of sets (lists
- Subject: Re: Union of sets (lists
- From: Michelle Steiner <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 19:48:10 -0700
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 12:51 PM, Gary Lists wrote:
Set Q has elements {apple, apple, pencil, orange, frog}
Set X has elements {apple, rubberband, penny, banana}
Both valid sets.
So "union" them [put them all in one backpack] to get:
Set Z has elements {apple, apple, apple, pencil, orange, rubberband,
banana,
frog}
If I recall correctly, apple should be listed only once in sets Q and Z
because the concept of apple is what is in the set. Similarly, there
are no duplicates in the set of integers or in the set of reals, and if
you have a union of the set of integers and the set of reals, each
integer would appear only once in the resulting set (which would
actually be a duplicate of the set of reals, since there are no
integers that are not in the set of reals).
But, the OP would only know which level of 'purity' her/his solution
was
requiring.
Unfortunately, the OP's example did not contain any duplicates.
According to Venn, the 'pure' versions are most correct.
Which is what I recall learning 40+ years ago as the way to do unions
and intersections.
--Michelle
"There's some good in the world, Mr. Frodo, and it's worth fighting
for."
_______________________________________________
applescript-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/applescript-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.