[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*From*: Stephan Merz <stephan.merz@xxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Thu, 2 Jan 2020 19:04:40 +0100*References*: <f675b9ad-4136-46ae-a3f7-4f294c3c3816@googlegroups.com> <648f7233-5af1-4b5c-a9b6-b5a170ca772b@googlegroups.com>

That should certainly be: if F is stronger than (implies) G, then G => H is stronger than F => H. Stephan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tlaplus" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tlaplus+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tlaplus/4BD841AA-E8FB-4EFC-A620-BFE230CB66EA%40gmail.com. |

**References**:**[tlaplus] Re: Why strong fairness implies weak fairness?***From:*Leslie Lamport

- Prev by Date:
**[tlaplus] Re: Why strong fairness implies weak fairness?** - Next by Date:
**[tlaplus] In the Composition Rule from section 10.2 of Specifying Systems, what is F_ij?** - Previous by thread:
**[tlaplus] Re: Why strong fairness implies weak fairness?** - Next by thread:
**[tlaplus] In the Composition Rule from section 10.2 of Specifying Systems, what is F_ij?** - Index(es):