KDE 4.0.0!

[Derek Broughton]

Sylviane et Perry White wrote:

> We are getting out of topic here but any mathematician will smile at he
> "Impeccable logic".

Well, I am one...

> If a set has only one element the set is the same as the element, right?

No.  I'm arguing that KDE 4 is not a set at all.

> Derek said:
>> Not buying it.  KDE 4 isn't a container.     At this time, it _is_ KDE
>> 4.0.0.
> (that above makes me uncomfortable)           ^--------------^
> Well, perhaps we should accept the fact that in common language we use
> words that are not understood/defined-yet. The definition of some terms
> may come or change with usage. Yet patterns concerning the "decimal"
> notation of versions and revisions has already been established long ago
> and we all expect that version X.0.0 will be folloved by something; should
> the definition of the version change, from not-container to container, "at
> this time", when a new revision is added?

Not at all.  KDE 4 is a desktop environment.  It is synonymous (that's
English, not Math) with KDE 4.0.0.  But in another sense, yes, it _will_
change with time.  It's not a piece of pure Math.  It's a computer
application, it evolves - it's closer to Biology than Math.  There will
come a time when there's a KDE 4.1 and a KDE 4.0, then you might speak of
KDE4 as a "set", but only with as much authority as you could talk of Homo
Sapiens as a member of the set of Primates (yes, I guess there is such a
set, but it isn't very meaningful in the mathematical world).
-- 
derek