On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Matt Rice <[email protected]> wrote:
> it seems as though ImmType has a 'mutability type contstraint' of > immutable and not mutable, > while Unboxed Type has a mutability type constraint of unspecified. > The intent in these examples is that mutable is intended except where specified or contradictory. The reason for this is to simplify the discussion. If the language has both mutable and non-mutable qualifiers, then you end up needing to deal with meta-construction issues, which is the innovation of Swaroop's thesis. For the present discussion, let's make the assumption that the only qualifiers in the language are those that "take away" mutability, and that in the absence of qualification a structure or field is presumptively mutable. shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
