Why should I switch to Python? - Infinity of Primes

[Cameron Laird]

In article <8ccoug$f4o$1 at pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>,
Nick Maclaren <nmm1 at cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>In article <NDBBKEGCNONMNKGDINPFGEJDDFAA.infonuovo at email.com>, "Dennis E. Hamilton" <infonuovo at email.com> writes:
>|> The standard approach is a proof by contradiction starting from the
>|> assumption that there is a largest prime.
>
>There is also a constructive proof based on the Fundamental
>Theorem of Arithmetic, that is little more complex.
			.
			.
			.
To what extent are constructive proofs supplanting *... ad
absurdum* as standards?  At about the time I left academe
I was working on my own arguments that our conventional
view of the former as "more complex" is, as Brouwer et al.
taught, essentially only convention.  Tilting at construc-
tivist windmills is one of the half-dozen careers I'm
considering for my retirement; I recognize, though, that
I've quite lost touch with current practice.
-- 

Cameron Laird <claird at NeoSoft.com>
Business:  http://www.Phaseit.net
Personal:  http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/home.html