[Haskell-cafe] Mystery of an Eq instance
allbery.b at gmail.com
Sat Sep 21 18:49:48 CEST 2013
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 12:43 PM, David Thomas <davidleothomas at gmail.com>wrote:
> Sure. An interesting, if not terribly relevant, fact is that there are
> more irrational numbers that we *can't* represent the above way than that
> we can (IIRC).
I think that kinda follows from diagonalization... it does handle more
cases than only using rationals, but pretty much by the Cantor diagonal
argument there's an infinite (indeed uncountably) number of reals that
cannot be captured by any such trick.
brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates
allbery.b at gmail.com ballbery at sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe