HaloO,
Luke Palmer wrote:
In fact, it might even bug me more. I'm a proponent of the idea that
one name (in a particular scope) is one concept. We don't overload +
to mean "concatenation", we don't overload << to mean "output", and we
don't overload > to mean "outside".
I agree. And have con
pirit of reals as used in maths to have no single Num $n
beeing equal to any range but the zero measure range $n..$n. This makes
two ranges equal if and only if their .min and .max are equal.
This gives the set of 4 dualing pairs of ops
< <= == ~~
>= > != !~ # negation of the above
The driving force behind t
On 12/23/05, TSa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> HaloO Everybody,
>
> here's a an idea from me about makeing range object a bit like
> junctions. That is a range object has a $.min and $.max and the
> following comparison behaviour:
>
> str num
>
> lt < strictly inside -+
> gt > stri
TSa skribis 2005-12-23 17:33 (+0100):
> lt < strictly inside -+
> gt > strictly outside --+ |
> eq == exactly on boundary --+ | |
>| | | negation
> ne != not on boundary --+ | |
> le <= inside or on boundary --+ |
> ge >= outside
Ups,
I forgot to mention things like
+('a0',,'e3') == +( ,
,
,
,
)
== +( 'a0','a1','a2','a3',
'b0','b1','b2','b3',
'c0','c1','c2','c3',
HaloO Everybody,
here's a an idea from me about makeing range object a bit like
junctions. That is a range object has a $.min and $.max and the
following comparison behaviour:
str num
lt < strictly inside -+
gt > strictly outside --+ |
eq == exactly on boundary --+ | |
