The second restriction is more severe. In fact, I think it's a show
stopper. The current signature of Plus is
Plus(
F: (T: LabelType) -> CombinatorialSpecies(T),
G: (T: LabelType) -> CombinatorialSpecies(T)
)(L: LabelType): CombinatorialSpecies(L) == add { ... }
Although this compiles and loads well, we get
)sh Plus
Plus(F: (LabelType -> CombinatorialSpecies T),G: (LabelType ->
CombinatorialSpecies T)) is a domain constructor
Abbreviation for Plus is PLUS
This constructor is exposed in this frame.
Issue )edit species.as to see algebra source code for PLUS
------------------------------- Operations --------------------------------
Plus(F,G) is a domain constructor.
Abbreviation for Plus is PLUS
This constructor is exposed in this frame.
Issue )edit species.as to see algebra source code for PLUS
------------------------------- Operations --------------------------------
That's it. In fact, we cannot even really try to use it:
(5) -> Plus(SingletonSpecies, SingletonSpecies) IntegerLabel
Although SingletonSpecies is the name of a constructor, a full type
must be specified in the context you have used it. Issue )show
SingletonSpecies for more information.
depressing.
Well, you are pretty far. Congratulations.
I have a feeling why
Plus(SingletonSpecies, SingletonSpecies) IntegerLabel
does not work. It is probably for the same reason that you cannot put
elements of type (T: LabelType) -> CombinatorialSpecies(T) into a list.
Maybe a rewrite with your LabelSpecies and "coerce" would do the job.
But that is ugly!!!
*We desparately need an open aldor compiler that can help the Axiom
interpreter.*
Ralf
_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
