Talk:Hofstadter Figure-Figure sequences: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted
Line 26: Line 26:
::::: It is pretty common to say "''S(n)''" while meaning "sequence ''S'' with ''n'' denoting its index", and it's unambiguous. For one thing, the very first sentence already said "sequence of positive integers", which is pretty impossible to be misunderstood as "sequence of sequences of integers". This is how human discuss math using a natural language, there's no need to exercise a context-free parser here. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 20:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
::::: It is pretty common to say "''S(n)''" while meaning "sequence ''S'' with ''n'' denoting its index", and it's unambiguous. For one thing, the very first sentence already said "sequence of positive integers", which is pretty impossible to be misunderstood as "sequence of sequences of integers". This is how human discuss math using a natural language, there's no need to exercise a context-free parser here. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 20:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


:::::: That's not the issue. S(n) would still be an integer sequence if S was a sequence of sequences. To resolve this conudrum, we have to incorporate the statement giving the first few values of S as a part of the definition. They are specified, of course (but if they had been omitted, then S(2) and thus R(2) would have been ambiguously defined). --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 11:32, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
:::::: That's not the issue. S(n) would still be an integer sequence if S was a sequence of sequences. To resolve this conudrum, we have to incorporate the statement giving the first few values of S as a part of the definition. They are specified, of course (but if they had been omitted, then S(2) and R(3) would have been ambiguously defined). --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 11:32, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Talk:Hofstadter_Figure-Figure_sequences"