Re: relations aren't types?
From: Marshall Spight <mspight_at_dnai.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:11:18 GMT
Message-ID: <GvJNb.64753$5V2.72075_at_attbi_s53>
> These aren't types you're talking about, according to standard CS
> definitions. A type has to have values.
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:11:18 GMT
Message-ID: <GvJNb.64753$5V2.72075_at_attbi_s53>
"Adrian Kubala" <adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net> wrote in message news:slrnc0cdli.99p.adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net...
>
> These aren't types you're talking about, according to standard CS
> definitions. A type has to have values.
"Bottom" (sometimes written _|_) is a type that has no values.
Marshall Received on Fri Jan 16 2004 - 05:11:18 CET