Anonymous user
Talk:Symmetric difference: Difference between revisions
m
→REXX Version 2: counterpointed my "only" valid point. -- ~~~~
Walterpachl (talk | contribs) (→REXX Version 2: 'a b c' can be taken to represent a set of 3 elements) |
m (→REXX Version 2: counterpointed my "only" valid point. -- ~~~~) |
||
Line 105:
Your only valid point is that my algorithm can't handle elements containing blanks.
<br>And, of coursem your '["Jim", "Mary", "John", "Jim", "Bob"]' is not a set!?!??--[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 19:19, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
-----
Er, no. I had other valid points.
As for what isn't a set, again, peruse the GAP, Pike, and Prolog programming entries (solutions). Whether or not the representation (of values and/or a SET) is a valid set or not doesn't reduce the fact that Rexx version 1 and 1.5, GAP, Pike, and Prolog entries correctly handle duplicates (or ''replicated values'', as Wiki uses).
As for the '''translate''' that you used (above), it removes commas (''',,,,), quotes ('''"'''), right and left brackets ('''][''') from the values, not just the delimiters. Now, the values shown don't have any of those characters, but still, it's good to program ''as if'' those values had them.
Once those characters are handled correctly, it's one small step to handle blanks and nulls. That's why the REXX versions 1 and 1.5 took extra precautions (more REXX code) to only ''strip'' those characters used as delimiters and not ''translate'' them out of existence. (well, translate them to blanks). Furthermore, the older REXX entries can also handle ''null'' values, which are legal in SETs. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 19:40, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
| |||