Re: Example of expression bias?

From: paul c <>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 04:35:40 GMT
Message-ID: <w04mg.65866$iF6.2157_at_pd7tw2no>

J M Davitt wrote:

> Tony D wrote:

>> 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.
> The idea gave me pause, too.  They emphasize that operators need not
> be declared as part of the type declaration.  Yes, the RM requires
> an operator that can distinguish values of given types -- but that
> operator need not be declared before the type appears in an attribute.

i wonder if such postponement could be useful.

p Received on Wed Jun 21 2006 - 06:35:40 CEST

Original text of this message