From: Todd Benson <caduceass@...>
Date: 2008-07-03T07:04:36+09:00
Subject: Re: Ranges and Enumerable problems

On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@gmail.com> wrote:
>   !(for all s: (s <=>s.succ) == -1)

Well, not really.  That gives you no information as to whether such a
thing does exist.  That statement would be true, but not definitive,
meaning, that it would be true if there is _no_ s that satisfies.

I think Robert was going for "at least 1" in his statement.

But, I guess that's just making a mountain out of a mole hill, because
I think Rick was just pointing out something, and not trying to be
being rigorously complete.

Todd