Hi,
I'm still thinking on how I can express neatly two fundamentally
aspects of a rule in Nomic.
I'm not a lawyer ;) but in my opinion there is two sorts of rules in
the legal system of any countries:
- The rules that say *what* is legal or illegal.
- The rules that say *how* to enforce the first
Hi,
I'm still thinking on how I can express neatly two fundamentally
aspects of a rule in Nomic.
I'm not a lawyer but in my opinion there is two sorts of rules in the
legal system of any countries:
- The rules that say *what* is legal or illegal.
- The rules that say *how* to enforce the first
Hi everybody,
I'm still working on implementing a nomic game in Haskell.
Although the game is pretty advanced, I'm still confused by one fundamental
question:
A nomic game is composed of rules.
A Rule is a sort of little program submitted by the player during the game.
They come in two fashions:
-
I find both heavy and redundant. The first forces me to specify if I want
an argument of not (with the constructors MR and NR)
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean here.
Do you know of a construction/abstraction that allows having or not an
argument (a variable number of arguments,
I wonder if you want a typeclass here, rather than a type? A Normal Rule is
pretty much a State Transformer, while a Meta Rule seems like a
higher-order function on Normal Rules[*]. These are different kinds of
things --- and I say kind advisedly --- so perhaps better to define the
specific
Yes I totally agree, they have different kind. A Normal Rule is *
whereas a Meta Rule is * - *.
But I have no experience with typeclasses. That could be what I'm looking for!
What they have in common? Well, Id' say that a rule (whatever sort it is) can:
- change the state of the game when executed
