Re: LSL boolean combinations involving undefined terms

>>>>> On 20 Jul 1995 17:49:01 GMT, cbj20@veblen (C.B. Jones) said:

>>>>> "horning" == horning  <horning@pa.dec.com> writes:

horning> Gary, This is an area that most people find murky some of
horning> the time, and some people find murky most of the time.

horning> ...
horning> Jim H.

horning> PS One of the tightest corners for the total function
horning> interpretation is division by zero.  You have to make
horning> sure that your generated by clause produces at least one
horning> value in the equivalence class of 1/0, something that is
horning> easy to overlook.  Without it, you can prove by induction
horning> all the "paradoxes" involving "hidden" divisions by zero
horning> that we learned in high school.  With it, of course, all
horning> your inductions get an extra, sometimes messy, case.

CBJ> I recently published a short note on this topic in Information
CBJ> Processing Letters. It would be interesting to know what Larch folk
CBJ> think about my comments. (Please e-mail - I'mm about to be away from
CBJ> News for 10 days)

But please post, too!  I'm curious, also.


Mitchell Wand				      Internet: wand@ccs.neu.edu
College of Computer Science, Northeastern University
360 Huntington Avenue #161CN, Boston, MA 02115     Phone: (617) 373 2072
World Wide Web: http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/wand   Fax:   (617) 373 5121


CBJ> @article{Jones95e,
CBJ>         author   = "C.B. Jones",
CBJ>         title    = "Partial functions and logics: A warning",
CBJ>         journal  = ipl,
CBJ>         volume   = 54, 
CBJ>         number   = 2, 
CBJ>         pages    = "65--67", 
CBJ>         year     = 1995
CBJ> }