[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure)
From: |
Gabriel Dos Reis |
Subject: |
Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure) |
Date: |
Sun, 12 Aug 2007 20:19:47 -0500 (CDT) |
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Bill Page wrote:
| On 8/12/07, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Bill Page wrote:
| > | ...
| > | 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?
| >
|
| Why do you think:
|
| import RepeatedSquaring(%)
|
| is referring to a named category?
I'm not saying that.
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 "*": (%,%) -> %
-- Gaby
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), (continued)
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
- RE: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Weiss, Juergen, 2007/08/12
- RE: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), William Sit, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure),
Gabriel Dos Reis <=
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), William Sit, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/12
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Bill Page, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), William Sit, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" (was curious algebra failure), Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/13
- [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" and bug, Ralf Hemmecke, 2007/08/13
- Re: [Axiom-developer] "has" and "with" and bug, William Sit, 2007/08/13