Al Viro wrote:
>> On the other hand, "canonicalize", while strange and new, unambiguously
>> means (b).
>>
>> Is there an already-existing word which means (b)?
>
>% webster normalize
There is a subtle difference between 'normal' and 'canonical',
but I can't quite put my finger on it. In number theory there's
a thorem that says:
Any positive integer n > 1 can be written uniquely in a
'canonical form'
n = p[1]**k[1] * p[2]**k[2] * ... * p[r]**k[r]
where, for i = 1,2,...,r, each k[i] is a positive integer
and each p[i] is a prime, with p[1] < p[2] < ... < p[r].
Note that it says 'a' canonical form, not 'the' canonical
form. I would argue that what is used in the above is 'normal
canonical form.' (And there is only one other canonical form
possible.)
------
Chuck
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 22:00:19 EST