Revision as of 21:47, 29 April 2009 edit Jakob.scholbach (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 6,825 edits support ← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:23, 29 April 2009 edit undo Fowler&fowler (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 64,989 edits →Euclidean algorithm: brief reply Next edit →
Line 68: ::::Actually I expect the Hilton and Wu book must be from the 60s too, since "Hilton" is Peter Hilton and he wrote several books in that period, all of which are well regarded but never really caught on like their competitors. Indeed, Hilton is rather infamous (in a humorous way) for writing a book on homology/cohomology (with Wylie) and using the terms homology and cohomology to refer the opposite way as everyone else used them. That never changed in subsequent editions even though by then it became clear they had lost the terminology reformation attempt. Herstein is also a bit weird in that he composes linear transformations from left to right instead of right to left. That never changed in recent printings. So anyway, if your point (which I think it may be) is that even though these books are old, but they were recently republished and so must reflect more modern terminology, I'm afraid I don't buy that. In my experience, republished classic texts often retain their classic (read: outdated) terminology, and the reader is supposed to be on guard for it. --[[User:C S\|C S]] ([[User talk:C S\|talk]]) 21:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC) :::::My point was simply that these books, regardless of their provenance, are still being used by students (as both books by Lang are, by your own admission), so it doesn't hurt to have the note. I have no idea if the terminology is outdated. Certainly Lowen's [http://books.google.com/books?id=8svFC09gGeMC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0#PPA27,M1 Graduate Algebra: The Noncommutative View] (2008), [http://www.ams.org/bookstore-getitem/item=GSM/91 published by the AMS] does look recent. Anyway, this is not a biggie for me. Regards, [[User:Fowler&fowler\|<font color="#B8860B">Fowler&fowler</font>]][[User talk:Fowler&fowler\|<font color="#708090">«Talk»</font>]] 22:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC) ;Comment on animation in lead

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Euclidean algorithm/archive1: Difference between revisions