Talk:Set of real numbers: Difference between revisions
→Extra Credit?
(→Extra Credit?: it's not easy enough?) |
|||
Line 30:
:::How about the optional task being changed to a description of what the length ''is'', followed by "find the length of the set formaed by <combination of ~5 simple sets>" ? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 16:10, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
::: The optional work requires a way to define the sets, it didn't ask you to systematically solve any equations to derive the set because that's irrelevant. The perl program I wrote didn't solve |sin(x)| = 1/2 in the program either. And, |sin(x)| = 1/2 means x = (n +/- 1/6) Pi, it's not rocket science. How much easier does it need to be? --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 00:34, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
:::: The issue is not that the requested numbers are not easy to find -- it's easy to solve without using the set implementation at all. But an approach that meaningfully uses the set implementation to find the lengths is hard to imagine. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 01:06, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
| |||