From tlumley at u.washington.edu  Wed Dec 14 20:48:21 2005
From: tlumley at u.washington.edu (Thomas Lumley)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:48:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389)
 (maybe a documentation deficiency?)
In-Reply-To: <43A058CC.4010605@acm.org>
References: <20051213150515.175B8A3C7@slim.kubism.ku.dk>
	<439F0D24.1080701@acm.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0512132104090.9376@gannet.stats>
	<43A058CC.4010605@acm.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0512141143590.14365@homer24.u.washington.edu>

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, Tony Plate wrote:
>
> That's what I was trying to say: the whole truth is that numeric index
> vectors that contain positive integral quantities can also contain
> zeros.  Upon rereading this passage yet again, I think it is more
> misleading than merely incomplete: the phrasings "positive integral
> quantities", and "*must* lie in the set ..." rule out the possibility of
> the vector containing zeros.
>

"Someone told me that you can't run without bouncing the ball in 
basketball. I got a basketball and tried it and it worked fine. He must be 
wrong"  -- a comp.lang.c standard

It doesn't rule out the the possibility of the vector containing zeros, it 
tells you that you should not put zeros in the vector.

 	-thomas



[Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389) (maybe a documentation deficiency?)
Thomas Lumley