Re: Example of expression bias?

J M Davitt wrote:
> CJD calls them type constraints; they define the set of values
> that constitute the type. Types are named, so the sets are named.
>
> The only thing I'd argue about in Cimode's definition is that
> operators are part of the data type. In fact, D+D make the point
> that the declaration of operators is orthogonal to the declaration
> of types -- given that the types are extant before the operators.
>

Before I go, one last point; I'm not sure how the declaration of operators can be *completely* orthogonal to type declaration; after all, there's not much point in declaring a type if you can't actually do anything with it. I understand that not all operators may be defined when the data type is first introduced, but at least some operators (equivalence definitely) will have to be there pretty much from the get-go. Received on Wed Jun 21 2006 - 04:24:34 CEST