Re: RM and abstract syntax trees
From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_ooyah.ac>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 01:11:06 GMT
Message-ID: <KCQVi.160786$Da.77605_at_pd7urf1no>
>
> { 0, {} }
> { 1, {} }
> { 2, {} }
> { 3, { -1, { 3, {} } } }
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 01:11:06 GMT
Message-ID: <KCQVi.160786$Da.77605_at_pd7urf1no>
Bob Badour wrote:
> paul c wrote:
...
>> So far, it looks like a peculiar kind of constraint to me. As >> somebody else say, go ahead and attack it, I can take it!
>
> { 0, {} }
> { 1, {} }
> { 2, {} }
> { 3, { -1, { 3, {} } } }
I think I agree with all of those and thanks. But I still think if I
remove A from the definition, there is only one possible tuple, ie., one
that we can ever express an extension for:
something like,
{{}}