[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure)
From: 
Gabriel Dos Reis 
Subject: 
Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure) 
Date: 
Sun, 12 Aug 2007 19:35:57 0500 (CDT) 
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Bill Page wrote:
 On 8/12/07, Gabriel Dos Reis <address@hidden> wrote:
 > On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Bill Page wrote:
 >  ...
 >  http://wiki.axiomdeveloper.org/SandBoxCategories
 > 
 >  I think this demonstrate that Davenport's rules are implemented in Spad.
 >
 > So, how do you think the original example (Monad using
expt$RepeatedSquare(%))
 > should behave according to those rules?
 >

 It should be fine because of rule 2:

 2. Anonymous types are equivalent when structurally equivalent
The parameter S in RepeatedSquare(S) of the category
SetCategory with "*": (%,%) > %
but RepeatedSquare is being called with a domain of a named category (Monad).
Rule 2 says:
2. Anonymous types are equivalent when stucturally equivalent
How would it apply?
 Gaby
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), (continued)
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
 RE: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Weiss, Juergen, 2007/08/12
 RE: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), William Sit, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure),
Gabriel Dos Reis <=
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), William Sit, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/13
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/13
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/13
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), William Sit, 2007/08/13
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/13
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/13