[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again
From: 
Gabriel Dos Reis 
Subject: 
Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again 
Date: 
17 Nov 2006 17:57:44 +0100 
Martin Rubey <address@hidden> writes:
 Gabriel Dos Reis <address@hidden> writes:


 >  I did quite a bit of work with Aldor now (within the species project
 >  together with Ralf), and I'm quite convinced of the features of this
 >  language. In particular, the semantics of Aldor feel very "sound" to me,
 >  i.e., Aldor usually does what I expect it to do and allows what I would
 >  expect it to allow.
 >
 > except when it does not, then you get depressed :)

 But so far not because of Aldor, only because of Axiom's inability to handle
 Aldor code.
well, I had impression following the discussion on aldorl  but that
is not important :)
[...]
 >  Gaby pointed out that "==" has different semantics in Aldor and Axiom,
but I
 >  have the feeling that this difference is not so severe: in fact, I don't
know
 >
 > yes, those are "little details" that are easy to fix in principle, but
 > might consume lot of resource to get right.

 Ahem, what I am saying is that if we want constants in future SPAD, we will
use
 the symbol "==" to introduce them. There are no constants in SPAD currently.
If
 we want to have types being first class, we will very likely need constants.
Yes, that is right.
 > From my perspective, I would like to support recursive types (get rid
 > of )abbrev), dependent types, algebraic types.

 What are "algebraic types"?
Ralf and you have been doing it in your project, I think. Basically,
an algebraic type is any data type on can construct with sum and
products. Examples,
BinaryTree t = Nil  Node t (BinaryTree t) (BinaryTree t)
Data of algebraic type are constructed with the constructors, and they
are deconstructed through pattern matching.
Boot has a very limited support for algebraic types, but from what I
understand so far it does not have pattern matching yet.
 Gaby
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, (continued)
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Peter Broadbery, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Martin Rubey, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Peter Broadbery, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Martin Rubey, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Waldek Hebisch, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, C Y, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Gabriel Dos Reis, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Martin Rubey, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Gabriel Dos Reis, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Martin Rubey, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again,
Gabriel Dos Reis <=
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Martin Rubey, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Gabriel Dos Reis, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Martin Rubey, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Gabriel Dos Reis, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Ralf Hemmecke, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Martin Rubey, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Ralf Hemmecke, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Martin Rubey, 2006/11/17
 RE: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Bill Page, 2006/11/17
 Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Re: SPAD and Aldor again, Ralf Hemmecke, 2006/11/17