From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: tomas@tuxteam.de Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: [External] : Re: How to make M-x TAB not work on (interactive) declaration? Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 20:28:25 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87y1q0h0pp.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87cz7azqs7.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87pmb5kxpl.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EX7/ELF1jdoQ7A29" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37972"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Michael Heerdegen Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 23 20:28:47 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pK2Up-0009cv-J0 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 20:28:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pK2Ua-0002iZ-GM; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 14:28:32 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pK2UZ-0002iQ-1X for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 14:28:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pK2UW-0000DB-NA for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 14:28:30 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject :Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=XjQrmKs1BPrWNDYq2rnqeBrKF2r8BBgqgEFILwzGkcI=; b=d4lUal51SAFksrlv8QqTcmFnth YZloqTgGgcFkkzp+Ex6uBTE5zTeWBeuLKaQlsX8h26KOYgNH7DLiPWCrxLaMtrCwoI/Wwy5E0Uq0s 92PT/hdyWyNkYi2v3+uD4P24LJ7Ge+Ypxdmj7GALsYi9kges+xr5FfftlwPc79r+Npu2pHdPv3607 BWIqR+zlJVtycU8dFcFaKPWJF93TC4UGyBE2x6H84KWrRk7hH0E46GNQ63o12CcUuVm8XdHHDki/7 qRoFLEvtgzBLtCEqi3SyPvFO4214I5je6i2sfxqL+TtuJ+3FO6INeTwQFg2oQfFD86uFaZliIjHX1 dShefzzA==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1pK2UT-0007m6-9q; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 20:28:25 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87pmb5kxpl.fsf@web.de> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:142521 Archived-At: --EX7/ELF1jdoQ7A29 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 05:44:06PM +0100, Michael Heerdegen wrote: > writes: >=20 > > Extend your sources. They aren't wrong, but they aren't right either. >=20 > BTW, treating 0 as a natural number or not reflects the difference in > these two things: you start counting objects with 1 (the first, the > second, ...). OTOH counts of finite sets include 0 as the count of the > empty set - there can be 0 objects of a certain property. >=20 > For both things you use the same set of numbers apart from 0. It's > of no value to argue which procedure should be the defining one for the > natural numbers. Absolutely agree. For me, it's more interesting as a "sociology of mathematicians" issue. The most satisfying observation I've heard, as I already said, is that mathematical logic and set theory tends to zero-counting (that would somewhat explain computer science's affinity to that). But as I said, in my experience (Germany), it runs across whole faculties. "Our" algebra or analysis folks were zero-counters, too. But it might be incomplete. Cheers --=20 t --EX7/ELF1jdoQ7A29 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCY87f0wAKCRAFyCz1etHa RtNlAJ9pycwcAUYmcFOAG1hevumT2KufGQCfTT5UqDwExHiiwWOu/3FrIE+RDcE= =aXtr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --EX7/ELF1jdoQ7A29--