You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Yes it does. I was wrong; I misremembered. I was so used to seeing {@MXs} that I forgot the true meaning of "one or more"!
The following rewrites are wrong:
hCO @hCO to @hCO because the former is "two or more", the later is one or more.
@MX @MX to @MX is wrong because the former is "two or more"
Thus, it would appear that my earlier insistence that "they are the same" (in #1396 (comment) and other comments) is wrong.
And now that I see the error of my ways ... what to do? The disjuncts differ, but they give the same parse ... Hmmm .... perhaps you are correct, these should be considered to be different.
.. Should I patch this? Do you want to patch this?
Yes it does. I was wrong; I misremembered. I was so used to seeing
{@MXs}
that I forgot the true meaning of "one or more"!The following rewrites are wrong:
hCO @hCO
to@hCO
because the former is "two or more", the later is one or more.@MX @MX
to@MX
is wrong because the former is "two or more"Thus, it would appear that my earlier insistence that "they are the same" (in #1396 (comment) and other comments) is wrong.
And now that I see the error of my ways ... what to do? The disjuncts differ, but they give the same parse ... Hmmm .... perhaps you are correct, these should be considered to be different.
.. Should I patch this? Do you want to patch this?
Originally posted by @linas in #1396 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: