On 4/4/06, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On the other hand, if junctions really are sets of sets, then maybe it's > a mistake to autocoerce junctions to sets by swiping their internal set > of values. Arguably any(1,2,3) should coerce not to > > (1,2,3) > > but to > > ( > (1), > (2), > (3), > (1,2), > (1,3), > (2,3), > (1,2,3), > )
I don't follow. Why is that the representation of any(1,2,3)? Is this a disjunctive normal form; i.e. is 2 < any(1,2,3) equivalent to the test: 2 < 1 || 2 < 2 || 2 < 3 || 2 < 1 && 2 < 2 || ... Or did you have something else in mind? Luke