On 13 Mar 2015 06:30, "Matt Oliveri" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote: > > If it would instead be parenthesized > > like this: > > (a->(b->c))=>((d->(e->f))=>r) > > > > then it seems basically the same as my afn notation, but with the > > arity variables elided. > > Wow, that was misleading. (b->c) and (e->f) look like types, but I was > confirming that they're actually not in this case, just tails of the > lists of arguments for the groups. But even then, who writes lists > that way? So that's probably not what it should be, to answer my own > question. But how about > (a->b->c)=>((d->e->f)=>r)
Just to note, this is not far from the notation I was using earlier: a b c -> d e f -> r However I am treating an arrow as an operator that can take multiple left parameters, so parens would be: (a b c -> (d e f -> r)) Keean.
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
