- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 14:50:28 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17600 --- Comment #6 from John Snelson <john.snelson@marklogic.com> 2012-06-26 14:50:31 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > Does it have to be a sequence of numeric values for every item in the input? No. > $seq[if (f(.)) then number(@min) to number(@max) else is-married(.)] > > I think the overloading of predicates is bad enough already without introducing > this. It might be slightly more complicated to evaluate, but it's actually extremely useful to users. The full semantics of a predicate expression "SEQ[PRED]" under this proposal could be expressed as such: for $s at $p in SEQ where typeswitch($s) case op:numeric+ return $p = $s default return fn:boolean($s) return $s This is not a very big departure from the present semantics: for $s at $p in SEQ where typeswitch($s) case op:numeric return $p eq $s default return fn:boolean($s) return $s -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:50:37 UTC