Re: predicate, constraints, header, relvar, and relation

From: David BL <davidbl_at_iinet.net.au>
Date: 20 Apr 2007 21:20:40 -0700
Message-ID: <1177129240.704744.283770@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>

On Apr 21, 9:07 am, Marshall <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 20, 5:26 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > I could see someone wanting to overload
> > the constraint concept to achieve this goal, but I think that would be a
> > mistake.
>
> Argh. Why, dammit?!
>
> I was planning on doing exactly that.

I think it makes sense for constraints to be regarded as simply a part of a given type. In that case if a language supports static typed literals then the compiler will check that the literal meets the constraint as part of the static type analysis. Received on Fri Apr 20 2007 - 23:20:40 CDT