# Re: [tlaplus] [Newbie Question] Engineer trying to get maths meaning

Hi Frank,

Would you have trouble understanding the following piece of code in a functional language (Scala)?

Set(Set(1, 2), Set(1, 3), Set(2, 3)).exists(Q =>
Q.contains(2)
) ///

Since the TLA+ code in lines 2-10 does not mention primed variables, you can think of it as a collection of set iterators (exists and forall) and set comprehensions (filter, map). The important differences are:

1. The order of set traversal is not fixed. You would not not expect a fixed order within hash sets in many languages either. Golang goes even further by randomizing iteration over maps.

2. The evaluation order of /\ and \/ is also arbitrary. Though TLC explores these expressions in a fixed top-down and left-to-right order.

3. As Rodrick mentioned, the rest is just mathematical syntax :-)

—
Igor

> On 03.10.2020, at 08:24, Stephan Merz <stephan.merz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> To follow up on this, Q is not really "defined" by this formula because a definition would have to be unambiguous. The formula checks for the existence of a quorum satisfying certain properties. The quantifier introduces (or "declares") a name Q for naming the value whose properties are being described in lines 2-10 and requires Q to belong to the set Quorum. The formula is true if some such value exists and false otherwise. Also, the scope of Q is restricted to the body of the formula, and Q has no meaning after the formula has been evaluated, in contrast to a definition that introduces a name that can be used later.
>
> Stephan
>
>> On 3 Oct 2020, at 01:42, Rodrick Chapman <rodrick@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> It's just syntax. It happens to be syntax that's based on century-old mathematical notation, but at the end of the day, it's still just syntax.
>>
>> The trouble you’re having is caused by your assumption that Q is defined on the left side of the colon ("\E Q \in Quorum"), and then used on the right side.
>>
>> But, in fact, Q is actually defined on the right side of the colon and then used on the left. In other words, we define Q and then ask “is there any element in the set Quorum that meets the definition of Q?”
>>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 12:44:13 PM UTC-5 franke...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm trying to understand this part of the paxos specification. I'm not trying to understand how paxos works, I get that, I'm just trying to understand how to read and understand this part of the specification.
>>
>> 01  /\ \E Q \in Quorum :
>> 02        LET Q1b == {m \in msgs : /\ m.type = "1b"
>> 03                                 /\ m.acc \in Q
>> 04                                 /\ m.bal = b}
>> 05            Q1bv == {m \in Q1b : m.mbal \geq 0}
>> 06        IN  /\ \A a \in Q : \E m \in Q1b : m.acc = a
>> 07            /\ \/ Q1bv = {}
>> 08               \/ \E m \in Q1bv :
>> 09                    /\ m.mval = v
>> 10                    /\ \A mm \in Q1bv : m.mbal \geq mm.mbal
>>
>> On line 01 you define that Q is in set of Quorum and then lines 02-10 define what Q will be. My confusion is on Line 03 Q is referenced. How can you reference something that hasn't been assigned a value yet.
>>
>> I may very well be suffering from "... brain washing done by years of C programming".
>>
>> Any help that I could get in understanding this would be greatly appreciated. Also, is there a place on the web were I can better familiarize my self with such concepts.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Frank
>>
>> --
>> 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.