Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8979189
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 15, 20262026-06-15T19:47:34+00:00 2026-06-15T19:47:34+00:00

There are a lot of LINQ-based implementations of the Composite Specification Pattern. I have

  • 0

There are a lot of LINQ-based implementations of the Composite Specification Pattern. I have not seen one that used Subsumption.

Are there any such examples that have been documented (blogs, etc.) or published as open source? I have an idea and proof of concept for how this could work by having an ExpressionVisitor translate every specification into a canonical logical form (CNF/DNF), but I am concerned that this is overly complicated. Is there a better way?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-15T19:47:35+00:00Added an answer on June 15, 2026 at 7:47 pm

    I am concerned that this is overly complicated. Is there a better way?

    The short answer is “No, there isn’t” 1

    The long answer: The “overly complicated” captures the essence of the problem: it is NP-hard. Here is a short informal proof relying upon the fact that the satisfiability problem is NP-complete:

    • Suppose that you have two Boolean formulas, A and B
    • You need to test if A implies B, or equivalently ¬A | B for all assignments of variables upon which A and B depend. In other words, you need a proof that F = ¬A | B is a tautology.
    • Suppose that the tautology test can be performed in polynomial time
    • Consider ¬F, the inverse of F. F is satisfiable if and only if ¬F is not a tautology
    • Use the hypothetical polynomial algorithm to test ¬F for being a tautology
    • The answer to “is F satisfiable” is the inverse of the answer to “is ¬F a tautology”
    • Therefore, an existence of a polynomial tautology checker would imply that the satisfiability problem is in P, and that P=NP.

    Of course the fact that the problem is NP-hard does not mean that there would be no solutions for practical cases: in fact, your approach with the conversion to a canonical form may produce OK results in many real-world situations. However, an absence of a known “good” algorithm often discourages active development of practical solutions2.


    1 With the obligatory “unless P=NP” disclaimer.

    2 Unless a “reasonably good” solution would do, which may very well be the case for your problem, if you allow for “false negatives”.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

There are a lot of blogs saying that a hasOwnProperty check should be used
I'm looking to learn LINQ, but I'm finding that there is a lot more
We have a program that uses Linq-To-Sql and does a lot of similar queries
I know that there are lot's of questons on this, but all seem to
There are a lot of iOS apps in the iTunes Store that, upon launch,
I have a table that contains a lot of data, where we particularly care
Ok, I have a question that I know is very opinionated (based on all
This is linq-to-sql I have a lot of different classes all doing the same
If I have a lot of columns to COALESCE in a TSQL query that
I have been doing a lot of reading but not coming up with any

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.