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
The current plan is to support and/or as operators with arbitrary arity, since this makes a lot of sense for DNF/CNF normal forms. However, this also means that (x & (y & z)) is a different formula than (x & y & z). This is fundamentally fine, but we should have a way to contract/expand such high arity operators. That is, at the very least have a function which will "merge" all and/or operators where possible, and also have a function that will "break them up" into normal binary operators.
One reason why we might want this is that not everything may work with the higher arity representation, and in some cases we simply need to output a representation with only binary operators.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The current plan is to support and/or as operators with arbitrary arity, since this makes a lot of sense for DNF/CNF normal forms. However, this also means that
(x & (y & z))
is a different formula than(x & y & z)
. This is fundamentally fine, but we should have a way to contract/expand such high arity operators. That is, at the very least have a function which will "merge" all and/or operators where possible, and also have a function that will "break them up" into normal binary operators.One reason why we might want this is that not everything may work with the higher arity representation, and in some cases we simply need to output a representation with only binary operators.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: