[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra fa
From: |
Gabriel Dos Reis |
Subject: |
Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure) |
Date: |
Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:59:35 -0500 (CDT) |
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
| > The Spad compiler tries to treat category constructors, domain
| > constructors, package constructors, and function calls as uniformly as
| > possible. What I mean by that is that it applies the principle:
| >
| > When calling a function, collect candidates, filter them by
| > applying the criteria that the arguments match the parameter types.
| > And select the best match if possible.
|
| Oh, I hope that will change. The compiler should *never* have a choice left.
| Either after filtering there remains *exactly* one possibility or the compiler
| should complain.
I believe that is what the Spad compiler does.
| > And that irrespective of whether the arguments are value expressions
| > or domain expressions.
|
| > By "matching" here, I don't necessarily mean only `pattern matching'.
| > Rather I mean `coercible'. For example an expression of type Integer
| > is coercible to Float because Float exports the following function
| >
| > coerce : Integer -> %
|
| That is exactly what Aldor does *not* do. It never applies "coerce" if one
| doesn't explicitly call for it. At the moment I find Aldor much better in this
| respect. You should consider that some people might implement a function that
| is not a nice "coerce" (although their function carries this name).
I don't think there is anything we can do about that. We can't police
people that name coerce a function that does pretend. Sometimes that is
bad, sometimes that is good.
-- Gaby
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), (continued)
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/13
- RE: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebrafailure), Weiss, Juergen, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/13
- [Axiom-developer] Another strange coercion, Franz Lehner, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Axiom-developer] Another strange coercion, Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/14
- [Axiom-developer] SubDomain in SPAD and not in Aldor, Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/16
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure),
Gabriel Dos Reis <=
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/14
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/14
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Martin Rubey, 2007/08/14
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebrafailure), William Sit, 2007/08/14
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebrafailure), Bill Page, 2007/08/14
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebrafailure), Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/15
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebrafailure), Martin Rubey, 2007/08/16
- Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebrafailure), William Sit, 2007/08/16
- [Axiom-developer] .spad, .input, .as and autocoercion, Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/16
- [Axiom-developer] Re: .spad, .input, .as and autocoercion, Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/16