<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.5" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;On Single Cycle Functions&#8221;</title>
	<link>http://www.literatecode.com/2006/05/19/on-single-cycle-functions/</link>
	<description>Think it easy</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 03:42:02 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: T-functions Testbed / Literatecode</title>
		<link>http://www.literatecode.com/2006/05/19/on-single-cycle-functions/#comment-13784</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Oct 2007 17:50:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.literatecode.com/2006/05/19/on-single-cycle-functions/#comment-13784</guid>
					<description>[...] During last year I’ve seen few submission papers that are based on my note about singe cycle functions. The latest such paper puzzled me. The authors have reconstructed theory quite well but at some point have jumped surprisingly to a premature and wrong conclusion. To make things simpler, I’ve sketched a small online tool to test functions. Write a function as a JavaScript subroutine, click on Evaluate button and if all mapping values are ‘1’ then the function is a single cycle and invertible. As simple as that. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] During last year I’ve seen few submission papers that are based on my note about singe cycle functions. The latest such paper puzzled me. The authors have reconstructed theory quite well but at some point have jumped surprisingly to a premature and wrong conclusion. To make things simpler, I’ve sketched a small online tool to test functions. Write a function as a JavaScript subroutine, click on Evaluate button and if all mapping values are ‘1’ then the function is a single cycle and invertible. As simple as that. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
