Re: An alternative to possreps

On 2011-05-27, David BL <davidbl_at_iinet.net.au> wrote:
> The purpose of this post is to outline an alternative to POSSREPS for
> distinguishing between a type and the physical representation of
> values of that type on a system.

I am beginning to think you are trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist.

<snip>
> we can represent any natural number starting from 0 and using the
> successor operator s as many times as required:
>
> 1 is logically represented by s(0)
> 2 is logically represented by s(s(0))
> 3 is logically represented by s(s(s(0)))
> etc

Well, so we can, but why do it in this context? You can't go back to first principles in everything every time, not if you want to end up with something usable.

<snip>
> The following two operators provide two different ways to select
> geometrical point values
<snip not-unreasonable explanation of a selector>
> Note that we don't designate some operators as "selectors" and some
> not.

Aaaaargh! I think this is the point at which I ought to give up!

Eric Received on Sun May 29 2011 - 14:34:02 CEST