Variations on implication (fwd)

Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters mertz at
Thu Feb 13 00:13:38 CET 2003

|> Paul Rubin wrote:
|> > => is the traditional mathematical symbol for boolean implication.
|> > -> looks more to me like some kind of pointer operation.  But either
|> > one is ok with me for this.

Michael Hudson <mwh at> wrote previously:
|In which context?  In my world, => is implication.  It's even
|$\implies$ in LaTeX, I think. -> is often used to denote a map.

FWIW, my math background is primarily in logic, model theory, and set
theory.  In those contexts, there is often a convention of using the
single line "->" for syntactic implication, i.e. predicate logic.  The
double line "=>" is reserved for semantic implication.  So you might
write (in a simple case):

    A -> B
    B -> C
    A -> C

Or:  given the predicates "A implies B" and "B implies C", you are
authorized to derive the predicate "A implies C" (syllogism).

Yours, Lulu...

---[ to our friends at TLAs (spread the word) ]--------------------------
Echelon North Korea Nazi cracking spy smuggle Columbia fissionable Stego
White Water strategic Clinton Delta Force militia TEMPEST Libya Mossad
---[ Postmodern Enterprises <mertz at> ]--------------------------

More information about the Python-list mailing list