[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Request for comments [voting amendment]



Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> writes:

> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 06:03:54PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
[...]
> >           Definition: An option F is in the beat path of option G if
> >           option G defeats option F or if there is some other option
> >           H where option H is in the beat path of G AND option F is in
> >           the beat path of H.
> 
> I'm not crazy about recursive definitions.
> 
>   Definition: An option F is in the beat path of option G if option G
>   defeats option F, or if there is another option H which defeats G, AND
>   option F defeats H.
> 
> With this definition you can mentally "build up" a beat path, applying
> F, G, and H to different options as you iterate.  Your definition does
> have the advantage of functioning better as pseudocode, though.  :)

AFAICT, your version only gives one level of transitivity, which does
not necessarily suffice.  An explicitly iterative version would have
to read along the lines of

  Definition: An option F is in the beat path of option G if option G
  defeats option F, or if there is a sequence of other options H_1,
  ..., H_n (where n may be 1) such that H_1 defeats F, G defeats H_n,
  AND for every i from 1 to n-1, H_{i+1} defeats H_i.

which I'm not convinced is better.

-- 
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
Finger amu@monk.mit.edu (NOT a valid e-mail address) for more info.



Reply to: