Wow. That really works. Pretty neat! (it does cause the interpreter to crash if you feed it unexpected (non-boolean) data though, :-) )
Regards, Elias On 21 March 2014 03:08, Kacper Gutowski <mwgam...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2014-03-21 00:23:41, Elias Mårtenson wrote: > > One of my experiments was very short, and tantalisingly close to correct: > > > > ≠\V > > > > Unfortunately, it's not quite right. Does anyone have an idea how to > coerce > > that one into being right? > > I couldn't come up with anything better, but if you don't mind having a > separate statement with assignment in place you could do something like: > > (V/V)←∊≠\¨V⊂V > > -k >
