On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:54:03 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | On 2005-03-10 01:01:18 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | > The asseryion that 0^0 is mathematically undefined is not a bogus > | > reason. It is a fact. > | > | I disagree. One can mathematically define 0^0 as 1. One often does > | this. > what you do is to set a local convention regardless of all > mathematical absurdities you run into. No, you follow the convention that all mathematicians that I know of follow, because it's generally recognized as the most useful one. Maybe there are mathematical subcultures in which a different convention (or no convention) is followed; I haven't spent time in such cultures. But if it's a "local convention", then it's one for a very large value of "local". David Carlton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
