Feature Request u&:(+`-) -> (+ x) u (- y)

[dorshmil]

this format already implemented for the case of:
u&.(+`-)
and it will make sense that & and &:
behave the same way

[HenryHRich]

That gerund case requires that one side of the gerund is empty. The form cannot be used for & because that would conflict with the u&n definition. Henry Rich

…

On Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 4:26 AM shmil ***@***.***> wrote: this format already implemented for the case of: u&.(+`-) and it will make sense that & and &: behave the same way — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#185>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEKVAJ75WIMYBAW22SJFPM3YYAET7AVCNFSM6AAAAABETVW7BSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43ASLTON2WKOZSGE4DGMZZGE3DEMY> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>