| 1 |
On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 19:39:33 -0400 |
| 2 |
"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> The two ways are not the same, and there is a reason sets exist in the |
| 4 |
> first place. People seem to be over looking that fact. I did not add |
| 5 |
> sets. They are not new. I am simply trying to expand their use. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Sets exist because people keep saying "let's have sets!" without |
| 8 |
agreeing on what sets actually are or how they are to be used. Sets |
| 9 |
remain half-baked because it turns out they don't make consistent sense |
| 10 |
in different contexts when you give them a non-superficial amount of |
| 11 |
thought. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
-- |
| 14 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives