Exh files are currently very hard to read. In particular, implications A => B are generally encoded as B || not A, even if this is not stated anywhere explicitely. This can be confusing, especially when there are more than one term in the left branch of this implication. In addition, it can also be confused with a normal disjunction. We could add significant clarity just by adding an implication syntax that would allow to write A => B directly.
Syntax could be :
A => B (mathematic)
B :- A (Prolog)
Others ?
Exh files are currently very hard to read. In particular, implications A => B are generally encoded as B || not A, even if this is not stated anywhere explicitely. This can be confusing, especially when there are more than one term in the left branch of this implication. In addition, it can also be confused with a normal disjunction. We could add significant clarity just by adding an implication syntax that would allow to write A => B directly.
Syntax could be :
A => B (mathematic)
B :- A (Prolog)
Others ?