[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: 
13 Aug 2007 00:28:49 0500 
"Bill Page" <address@hidden> writes:
[...]
 > > I'm saying that the parameter S of the default package
 > > Monad&  generated for the default implementation of the
 > > category Monad  is of the named category Monad. It is
 > > that parameter S which is being used to instantiate
 > >RepeatedSquaring. However, RepeatedSquaring expects its
 > >(domain) argument to be of the unnamed category
 > >
 > > SetCategory with "*": (%,%) > %

 Your statement of the problem is a little confusing to me since the
 parameter S is the parameter of RepeatedSquaring. But as you say, it's
 type is given by the unnamed category above. You are concerned because
 what is being passed to RepeatedSquaring is a domain of type category
 named Monad. But clearly a domain of type Monad is also is a member of

 SetCategory with "*": (%,%) > %

 since Monad is a subcategory of this category  any domain that "has"
 Monad will necessarily provide all of the exports required by
 RepeatedSquaring. RepeatedSquaring requires it's (domain) argument to
 be of type that is a subcategory of this unnamed category.
Bill, it is getting late so I'll try to give a longer reply later.
I just wanted to say one thing: We should distinguish the notion of
"being of a member of T" from "being coercible to T"  as the Spad
language does. Argument passing in function calls follows the
semantics of "being coercible to the type of formal parameter".
 Gaby
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), (continued)
 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, 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), 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 <=
 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
 [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" and bug, Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/13
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" and bug, William Sit, 2007/08/13
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] "has" and "with" and bug, Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/13
 [Axiomdeveloper] Re: "has" and "with" and bug, Gabriel Dos Reis, 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