On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> wrote: > On 2011-07-17, Matt Benson wrote: > >> Currently each nested condition is xor'd against the cumulative result, thus: > >> xor(true, false) == true >> xor(true, false, true) == false >> xor(true, false, true, false) == false > >> Is this correct? It would seem that semantically an xor over multiple >> nested conditions should mean that exactly one value should evaluate >> true in order for the xor operation to yield truth. > > While my gut feeling agrees with what you describe the documentation of > the xor description actually says > > ,---- > | It only evaluates to true if an odd number of nested conditions are true. > `---- >
So is this an accepted "kind of xor"? > If you need the "other kind of xor" then a new container would be > required. "exactlyOneOf" or something similar? I don't need it, personally, yet. Was working in Commons Lang, noticed the discrepancy between oacl.BooleanUtils.xor() and Ant's xor condition, and wanted to follow up. br, Matt > > Stefan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
