| ▲ | 13hunteo 3 hours ago | |
If you want to handle the three cases individually using your implementation, you would have to make another function call, rather than just the one | ||
| ▲ | globular-toast 2 hours ago | parent [-] | |
You don't, although it is perhaps quite awkard:
But there's nothing stopping adding that middle one as another property, again without breaking compatibility:
The point is, you don't actually have to break compatibility here, you can just define more predicates to add the extra granularity without breaking the existing ones. | ||