Re: Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- From: "Rick Smith" <ricksmith@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:54:48 -0500
"Oliver Wong" <owong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:S5DUf.3240$K11.1107@xxxxxxxxxxx
For
"Rick Smith" <ricksmith@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1225q86q8fh8528@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Oliver Wong" <owong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fGAUf.2907$K11.1151@xxxxxxxxxxx
[snip]
Not sure if "equivalence" has some special meaning in COBOL, but in
math, equivalence is a symmetric relationship. So if A is equivalent to
B,
then it is always true that B is equivalent to A.
My dictionary, RHCD, provides the special definition
for "equivalent", when used for Mathematics, as
"capable of being set into one-to-one correspondence"
and, for "one-to-one", "associating with each element
in one set a unique element in a second set".
I believe this is consistent with the definition I was using above.
there to exist a one-to-one correspondence between two sets, those twosets
must be of equal size. (This sometimes leads to surprising results, suchas
the set of even positive numbers is of the same size as the set of allis
integers, including the odd and negative ones).
Consider that age 28 is equivalent to adult, but not the
reverse; that is, associating the set of ages with the set
of {baby, child, teenager, adult, senior}.
The set of natural numbers is NOT in a one to one correspondance with
the set {baby, child, teen, adult, senior}, so the term "equivalent" here
not being used in the mathematical sense.
Maybe. The clearest description I have found so far
is "asymmetric relation". An asymmetric relation seems
not to be an "equivalence relation", so 'not mathematical
sense' seems about right. Perhaps, logically equivalent then.
(Though Russell is said to have claimed that mathematics
is a branch of logic!)
As to letter case in COBOL, there are some lowercase
letters that may translate to either of two uppercase
letters, depending on context; while uppercase letters
only map to one lowercase letter, that provided in an
annex in the COBOL standard.
If that's the case (and I wouldn't be too surprised if it were), then
"equivalence" is probably the wrong term to describe the mapping.
I am going to do myself a big favor and let WG4/J4
decide that question.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- From: Oliver Wong
- Re: Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- References:
- Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- From: Rick Smith
- Re: Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- From: Oliver Wong
- Re: Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- From: Rick Smith
- Re: Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- From: Oliver Wong
- Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- Prev by Date: Re: Any comments?
- Next by Date: Re: Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- Previous by thread: Re: Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- Next by thread: Re: Lowercase equivalent to uppercase, or vice versa
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|