&dom in body

[MaxOstrowski]

I would like to allow domain constraints also in the body of a rule.
This is a convenient check if a variable is in a certain range/set of elements.
What do you think @rkaminsk ?

[MaxOstrowski]

This would also help with the implementation of a flatzinc interface, where there exists a reified version of this constraint.

[rkaminsk]

Just go ahead. If you want to have such a feature. If this really helps to make encoding easier is another question. A simple &dom constraint is quite easy to convert to a sum:

    &dom { L..R } = V is equivalent to &sum { V } >= L, &sum { V } <= R.

For general &dom constraints you will have to introduce a disjunction. You will probably have to implement something separately for the body because the current translation is specialized for the head (for better propagation).

[MaxOstrowski]

Thanks.
I currently simply use an encoding to translate it away.
Unfortunately, my example was not about the simple L..R case.