# Re: Is a function a relation?

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 01:34:17 -0700 (PDT)

Message-ID: <162da63d-18e1-4665-ac61-d551d2613995_at_k2g2000yql.googlegroups.com>

On 23 juin, 08:14, David BL <davi..._at_iinet.net.au> wrote:

> On Jun 23, 1:35 pm, David BL <davi..._at_iinet.net.au> wrote:

*>
**> > Yes that's one way of looking at it.
**>
**> I'll expand on what I mean by that. It seems to me that one could use
**> special conventions to "show" that just about any type can be regarded
**> as a specialisation of a relation. E.g. one could say that a whole
**> number in [0,255] is a relation by introducing symbols to represent
**> 1,2,4,8,...,128 and the relation records a set of symbols that are
**> then interpreted in the manner of an 8 bit unsigned representation.
*

Relations is a possible construct that can represent *any* type if we
are to consider that a type is a set of values. Nevertherless, a
logical computing model (to define among other things the physical
reprentation of domain values) must be defined first (that is what I
spent the last 10 years working onto)...Hope this helps...
Received on Tue Jun 23 2009 - 10:34:17 CEST