>>115-116
I was talking about what the concept 'unordered' means in math. Of course, all memory is ordered on a computer, and memory itself corresponds to some particular circuit with a particular structure and so on. Unordered in programming means that there is a "contract" where you don't use the order, or merely don't expose the order through some interface - the internals of how you hold the items is irrelevant. Unordered in math is just that, but without looking at the implementation (if you do, you're talking about a particular interpretation of some concept).
I wanted this discussion to be civil, so I refrained from resort to restating your past history as
>>113 did, but it's hard to do so when you keep confusing interfaces with implementations, and the "what should be" with "what is".