RE: [CASHeW-s-engine] Can delta tick if sigma is hidden?

[Simon D. Foster]

On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 18:19 +0000, Barry Norton wrote:
> > I think we really need to rewrite the syntax so that it only includes
> > the core syntax of CaSE, and derive the rest using functions.
> Shouldn't
> > be difficult, I'll get on with it ASAP.
> 
> I think you should, but I have a different suggestion (thereafter) -
> generalise the syntax further (for the theory) and implement a
> sub-calculus to that!

Ok. I did try seeing whether lambda could easily be added into CaSE
(like pi), but it is quite difficult, so may I defer that. The problem
is not the actions themselves, but how one performs elimination with
regard to the bindings.

> The reason I keep saying "in a maximal progress scenario" is that I
> think we need a non-MP language for the bulk of the workflow...
>
> (Which is why I'm concerned that you understand the difference between
> the synchronisation of actions and clocks, and what hiding means in
> itself, but am less concerned for now about which clocks are
> pre-empted... you've probably seen this in my responses.)

No problem, as I say I'll get on with it.

-Si.

-- 
Simon D. Foster <address@hidden>
Sheffield University