Re: [Fwd: Re: junctions and conditionals]

2009-04-01 Thread Martin D Kealey
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Richard Hainsworth wrote: > A closer examination of Martin's message indicates that he tends to think > that hitting a junction ought to thread the entire program throughout the > rest of the lifespan of said junction Yes -- and well put, thank-you. The trick is that since con

Re: [Fwd: Re: junctions and conditionals]

2009-04-01 Thread TSa
HaloO, Richard Hainsworth wrote: ( $a <= any(-1,+1) && any(-1,+1) <= $b )(*A) [..] $tmp = any(-1,+1); $a <= $tmp && $tmp <= $b (*B*) Quite how the lines I have labelled (A) and (*B*) are different, I do not understand. Unless wrapping a junctio

Re: [Fwd: Re: junctions and conditionals]

2009-04-01 Thread Henry Baragar
On Wednesday, April 01 2009 07:38 am, Richard Hainsworth wrote: > Right now, yes.  I'm arguing that the way that they're designed to > work doesn't DWIM.  Try a slightly different example: > >     0 <= $x <= 1 # 0 is less than $x is less than 1. >     $x ~~ 0..1 # $x is in the range of 0 to 1. > >

[Fwd: Re: junctions and conditionals]

2009-04-01 Thread Richard Hainsworth
This email was mistakenly not sent to the p6l list. Jon writes: On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Richard Hainsworth wrote: Jon Lang wrote: In "Junction Algebra", Martin Kealey wrote: On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, Mark J. Reed wrote: ( $a <= any(-1,+1) <= $b ) == ( $a <= any(-1,+1) && a