Re: [Fenfire-dev] PEG swamp_easier--benja: An easier API for Swamp

[Tuomas Lukka]

On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 02:29:49PM +0300, Benja Fallenstein wrote:
> Tuomas Lukka wrote:
> >Why *should* it work for "equivalent" triples?
> 
> Because the same thing can have more than one name (node in the graph), 
> and if e.g. "c = d," then the triple "a b c" entails "a b d." Not 
> allowing "a b d" to be in a graph at the same time as "a b c" is like a 
> calculator that can compute 7+3+2, but not 7+3+0+2.

As long as the definition of equivalence is as fuzzy as you have made
out, I think it's fine: I see it more like 7+3+2 != 7+3+2+epsilon  

If someone wants equivalences to work, what they can do is *unify* 
the equivalent nodes of the graph **before** running code on it.

        Tuomas