Message363665
Thanks for the reference @Raymond. I could not find any mention of the union relationships for ≤ and ≥ though. Since they are always valid for Boolean values, in the same way that ≠ is always the complement of = for Boolean values and default implemented as such in the interpreter, what do you think of default implementing these union relationships in the interpreter? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2020-03-08 14:44:20 | maggyero | set | recipients:
+ maggyero, rhettinger |
2020-03-08 14:44:20 | maggyero | set | messageid: <1583678660.3.0.460032904848.issue39862@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
2020-03-08 14:44:20 | maggyero | link | issue39862 messages |
2020-03-08 14:44:20 | maggyero | create | |
|