- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:43:41 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group WG <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Jun 3, 2010, at 3:39 PM, Gregory Williams wrote: > On Jun 3, 2010, at 3:34 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > >> The prototype definitions define the types of arguments accepted by the function and that after evaluation of expressions. > > Ah, sorry. My mistake. I was misunderstanding the blockquoted prototypes in each section as something closer to grammar definitions (but didn't bother to actually check the grammar). After saying that, I think I'm still confused. Aren't IN and NOT IN similar to IF and COALESCE in that they treat evaluation errors differently? 2 IN (1/0, 2) yielding true seems like IN would have to function like COALESCE. Have I misunderstood how the evaluation happens? thanks, .greg
Received on Thursday, 3 June 2010 19:44:13 UTC