Path: csiph.com!goblin3!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript
Subject: Re: passing a set of numbers to a function
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 15:42:15 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <87oabvkvu0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <19679ed0-c594-4f7e-817c-a72bd5c10411@googlegroups.com> <sets-20160202102610@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <22041181.SJtjrm8m6U@PointedEars.de> <dna6bbll0vvjn3gvovc9t822fduak5inlu@4ax.com> <87r3gso59h.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <1603158.xI32ru06Pi@PointedEars.de> <58b65993-5943-4f8e-a4e2-9e97bb1feea3@googlegroups.com> <n926p5$rqt$1@news.albasani.net> <7de86700-d479-49ff-819f-8187843a09b8@googlegroups.com> <87twlnkyye.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <input-20160205154356@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="017616aa25f81ec581c44d76d61ba2f3"; logging-data="2983"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX196qSpWqfAobq6o2WyaugyJni16FTbELNY="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Dij7x3QfGDN/MoH6JBAP3kcbWMQ= sha1:vhNJim4FF6tgqn0Vy2tuShEjOZs=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.807399c40d2be70e674e.20160205154215GMT.87oabvkvu0.fsf@bsb.me.uk
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:29546

ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:

> Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:
>>To implement something like ("a" | "b") & ~"c" you parse the expression
>>and build a matching functions as you go.  Given something like
>
>   One also might replace every »"string"« by »(x==="string")«.

Yes, though that was not the intended semantics.  With your
interpretation the example has a redundant clause.

>   This would give:
>
> ((x==="string") | (x==="string")) & ~(x==="string")
>
>   . One then can also replace some operators:
>
> ((x==="string") || (x==="string")) && !(x==="string")
>
>   . Finally, one could then call »Function« with 
>
> new Function( 'x', '((x==="string") || (x==="string")) && !(x==="string")' )
>
>   if there were no problems with security and 
>   incorrect inputs.

As you say, it's possible to do this sort of thing via string
manipulation, but I've found it to be fiddly in practice.

-- 
Ben.