[r-t] Candidate definition #10

[Don Morrison]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Richard Smith <richard at ex-parrot.com> wrote:
>> The stage, S, of B, is the number bells ringing that are
>> not non-changing bells.
>
> Although this is a perfectly self-consistent definition of
> 'stage', I can see it causing us problems later when we
> get on to methods.  (This problem applies to your previous
> definitions too.)

Yes, I see what you mean. I was thinking that a block (or now perhaps
"stage fragment") of stage N might be made of of rows generated by one
or more methods of stage <N.

Any suggestions for how to deal with this problem? Maybe explicitly
when we define the stage of a method? Or should we make up some new
word to mean the stage of a stage fragment (in which case it won't
be a stage fragment any longer, I presume)?





-- 
Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"A poem is never finished, only abandoned."    -- W H Auden