28 May
2011
28 May
'11
8:16 p.m.
AMDG On 05/28/2011 12:42 PM, Pyry Jahkola wrote:
On 2011-05-28 21:59:57 +0300, Matt Calabrese said:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj@gmail.com>wrote:
I don't have the concepts proposal handy, but doesn't LessThanComparable have an axiom that requires that (a < b) is equivalent to (b > a)?
Yes.
axiom Consistency(T a, T b) { (a > b) == (b < a); (a <= b) == !(b < a); (a >= b) == !(a < b); }
For what it's worth, e.g. NaN's are an exception to that rule...
It's not an exception. The axiom only applies to LessThanComparable types. Technically, double isn't LessThanComparable, because it violates this rule. In Christ, Steven Watanabe