3 ms·
Correct. A bijection implies isomorphism in the category of sets. Thus an isomorphism exists. I suppose we need to convince ourselves that algorithms and abstra
by greydius 10y ago
Correct. A bijection implies isomorphism in the category of sets. Thus an isomorphism exists. I suppose we need to convince ourselves that algorithms and abstract syntax trees do indeed form sets. (Exclude such things as "the algorithm that computes the set of all algorithms", etc.)
- Bahamut 10y agoBut that is typically not how the word is used because to substitute bijection with isomorphism, it would only make sense when talking about cardinality - that is not how you used it.