Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #6970
| From | Martijn van Buul <pino@dohd.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: linear programming |
| Date | 2011-06-20 19:24 +0000 |
| Organization | Eindhoven University of Technology |
| Message-ID | <slrnivv7ij.kk5.pino@mud.stack.nl> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <527d07f5-0d08-4e29-9c58-8c87b2b18e89@k27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> <itnctg$lad$1@dont-email.me> <51a740f2-8558-46ad-95fa-cc879b6af75c@u19g2000vbi.googlegroups.com> <slrnivuoss.kk5.pino@mud.stack.nl> <23a38e00-f9bb-4aa5-a8d8-4620364e4514@gc3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> |
* gwowen: > On Jun 20, 4:13?pm, Martijn van Buul <p...@dohd.org> wrote: >> * gwowen: >> >> > Usually yes. ?But this is phrased like'If "something" satifies >> > "condition A", then we say it is "A-ified".' ?In English-as-she-is- >> > used-by-mathematicians that's *a definition* of "A-ified". >> >> Uh, most mathematicians I know would have used "if and only if" or >> any of its alternatives in that case; in writing it would've been 'iff'. > > Not in undergraduate lecture notes, which are much more informal. Your problem, not mine. Don't make any claims then. You're the one who takes an informal explanation out of context, not me. > Anyway, go find one of the numerous mathematicians of your > acquaintance and ask them what the definition an "unbounded linear > program" is. Then ask them what the definition of "unbounded feasible > region" is. Irrelevant. I didn't question the validity of that statement. I questioned the validity of your "argument". > Then, come back, and admit that I know of what I speak. Oh, I'll admit what I already know: You're awfully full of yourself, but have very little to show. But that applies to a lot of people here, so you're in good company. -- Martijn van Buul - pino@dohd.org
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
linear programming eric <cneric12lin0@gmail.com> - 2011-06-19 20:53 -0700
Re: linear programming "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 08:36 +0200
Re: linear programming eric <cneric12lin0@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 00:58 -0700
Re: linear programming "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 11:38 +0200
Re: linear programming gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 03:07 -0700
Re: linear programming "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 14:09 +0200
Re: linear programming gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 05:59 -0700
Re: linear programming gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 06:03 -0700
Re: linear programming Martijn van Buul <pino@dohd.org> - 2011-06-20 15:13 +0000
Re: linear programming gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 08:38 -0700
Re: linear programming Martijn van Buul <pino@dohd.org> - 2011-06-20 19:24 +0000
Re: linear programming Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-21 06:30 +0100
Re: linear programming gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-21 00:17 -0700
[OT] Re: linear programming Kai-Uwe Bux <jkherciueh@gmx.net> - 2011-06-20 21:56 +0200
Re: linear programming eric <cneric12lin0@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 17:27 -0700
Re: linear programming "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-20 11:17 +0100
Re: linear programming gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 03:07 -0700
[OT] Re: linear programming Kai-Uwe Bux <jkherciueh@gmx.net> - 2011-06-20 19:38 +0200
csiph-web