From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,f6c360ce344b2364 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.238.65 with SMTP id vi1mr18043857pbc.7.1340749765049; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:29:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Path: l9ni23489pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!volia.net!news2.volia.net!feed-A.news.volia.net!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!munin.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: My Invention of "Bug Sort". Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:29:20 -0500 Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation Message-ID: References: <3852c348-a728-44ed-b065-c8a596c1e235@googlegroups.com><698085ff-6ca3-4a0e-b963-11bdcf11e6b5@googlegroups.com> <1u9ig9nnen59q$.ajozwlsekr7l.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1340749763 17210 69.95.181.76 (26 Jun 2012 22:29:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:29:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Date: 2012-06-26T17:29:20-05:00 List-Id: "Simon Wright" wrote in message news:m2sjdnyrlh.fsf@pushface.org... ... > I notice http://www.ada-auth.org/standards/12rm/html/RM-A-18.html#p5 - > the last part of this is very terse. Wikipedia suggests that "(or both)" > should be added. But I'm still baffled; and this paragraph appears to be > for users, not implementers! This is the definition of "strict weak ordering", it is described as precisely as possible. There's nothing really here for users; I don't think its possible to define this informally and have it make any sense. I have no idea where you are adding "or both", but if it is to the end of the sentence, it's unnecessary as the truth table for "or" includes True or True = True. "or" is not "xor"! (I realize that when writing English, there is an ambiguity - "or" sometimes is taken to mean "xor". That might explain why wikipedia would say that. But this is an Ada text, and "or" is well-defined here - and it's not "xor"!!) As to why you're baffled, I can't say; this is pretty straightforward algebra. What else could this say? (Without the "strict weak ordering" requirement, it's impossible to have a complete ordering and we cannot expect implementations to do sensible things in that case.) Randy.