From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2008-07-03T18:23:12+09:00
Subject: Re: Ranges and Enumerable problems

2008/7/3 Todd Benson <caduceass@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Todd Benson <caduceass@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Okay, that may have been a major faux pas on my part :-)

It is. :-)  not (for all e: X(e)) <=> (there is at least one e: not X(e))

Kind regards

robert


-- 
use.inject do |as, often| as.you_can - without end