Re: First feedback on MINUS

On 9 Jul 2009, at 17:32, Simon Schenk wrote:
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 09.07.2009, 12:08 -0400 schrieb Lee Feigenbaum:
>> Simon Schenk wrote:
>>> After some chatting with colleagues:
>>>
>>> 1) Whatever semantics we choose, the operator should not be called
>>> MINUS, as its semantics is not even roughly clear intuitively.
>>>
>>> 2) A restriction to min. 1 shared variable is not intuitive.
>>
>> Simon, does #2 mean explicitly that your colleagues expect that
>>
>> {?a="a"} MINUS {?b="b"} = no solutions?
>
> exactly.

I have to say that I don't find that any more or less surprising than  
the alternative.

- Steve

-- 
Steve Harris
Garlik Limited, 2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK
+44(0)20 8973 2465  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10  
9AD

Received on Thursday, 9 July 2009 16:44:25 UTC