Re: How to prove "Cfls are not closed under shuffling"

It seems that your definition means "a perfect shuffle", which is a
bit different from my case.

My case is that:

If L1 = {ab} and L2 = {cde}, then L1 & L2 = {abcde, acbde,
acdeb,....} which mean all possible combinations (result is set of
strings) which retain the previous order of respective strings.

More e.g, If L1 = {ab, fg} and L2 = {cde}, then L1 & L2 = {abcde,
acbde, acdeb, fgcde, cdefg......}

So the problem is

if i have L1 and L2 c.f.l, is that L1 & L2 c.f Or if it's not, how to
prove?


.