From: Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@...>
Date: 2008-07-03T05:50:46+09:00
Subject: Re: Ranges and Enumerable problems

------=_Part_5508_6575528.1215032028264
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com>
wrote:

> On 02.07.2008 19:48, Adam Shelly wrote:
>
>> On 7/2/08, Robert Dober <robert.dober@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Adam Shelly <adam.shelly@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Some odd behavior arises because
>>>> (s<=>s.succ) != -1 for all s.
>>>>
>>> Is that so??????
>>>
>>> I guess you mean there exists an s for which ...
>>>
>>>  I'm not sure what you mean
>>
>
> He meant
>
> You said: for all s: (s<=>s.succ) != -1
>
> He said: there exists at least one s: (s<=>s.succ) != -1
>

Or another way of saying the same thing (as Robert D.):

   !(for all s: (s <=>s.succ) == -1)

-- 
Rick DeNatale

My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/

------=_Part_5508_6575528.1215032028264--