Re: Date's First Great Blunder

From: Lauri Pietarinen <lauri.pietarinen_at_atbusiness.com>
Date: 15 Apr 2004 13:44:06 -0700
Message-ID: <e9d83568.0404151244.1ceff0d0_at_posting.google.com>

alfredo_at_ncs.es (Alfredo Novoa) wrote in message news:<407e7ff8.7916112_at_news.wanadoo.es>...

> Type is a word with a long pedigree and a lot more precise than class.
> By the way, strictly speaking, domain is not exactly the same as type.
> A domain is a type minus the operators.

I would suggest that operators are not necessarily part of the type definition. At least there are operators that could belong to many types, such as
speed(distance, time).

regards,
Lauri Pietarinen Received on Thu Apr 15 2004 - 22:44:06 CEST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Dawn M. Wolthuis: "Re: c.d.theory glossary"
Previous message: mAsterdam: "Re: c.d.theory glossary"
Maybe in reply to: Dawn M. Wolthuis: "Date's First Great Blunder"
In reply to Alfredo Novoa: "Re: Date's First Great Blunder"
Next in thread: Anthony W. Youngman: "Re: Total Cost of Ownership"
Reply: Alfredo Novoa: "Re: Date's First Great Blunder"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message