<gan...@earth.li> wrote: > I think the important pieces are an appropriate set of definitions, a set of > properties that all patch system should obey, a proof that the existing > implementation of "primitive" patches in darcs obeys those properties, and a > proof that anything that obeys those properties does indeed behave > consistently when you commute and merge patches in it.
It may be my own ignorance at work, but it's not clear to me how much mileage you would get out of this scheme. The basic properties of patch theory seem to be extremely general. Consistency with these properties alone doesn't appear to tell me much about how the system is going to behave when I use it. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
