On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]>wrote:
> Why does IBM have this compulsion to be different from everyone else > and invent its own terminology rather than using a conventional, > well-understood word such as "bijective"? > Harumph. It may be an established and well-defined term, and your point is valid, but "conventional" and "well-understood" are arguable. Sure, the math PhDs use that term, but reg'lar folks don't. However, it would have behooved IBM to define and use it. Or maybe the people who wrote that don't know it... -- zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
