Anonymous user
Talk:Set of real numbers: Difference between revisions
→Extra Credit?
Line 47:
::::::::: Ok, that gets it closer to the sort of data I would need, but it's still not really relevant. The issue is: to test for empty set I need a list of all the potential inflection points, but I do not care if they are currently valid interval bounds, so it was still simpler to just ignore the set data structures and use special case logic for computing lengths.
::::::::: (Also, this sub-task could use some required examples, but I made some up instead.) --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 00:56, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
::::::::: I don't really want to specify a test case for empty test. To make available operations more or less complete, you need one of the three (besides ones already in the mandetory part): is empty, set equality, or is subset. Provide any one, and the other two can be easily constructed through other binary operators. It just seemed to me that empty test is likely the least amount of work. And since length calculation would require one of them (or prove me wrong), a test case isn't necessary. As to how you do any of the required or optional task, I'm not really concerned: if all the basic methods are available, the implementation should be reasonably usable, that's all that matters. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 01:37, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
| |||