* Conor McBride [2005-01-26 13:38]:
> Sebastian Hanowski wrote:
> > * Thorsten Altenkirch [2005-01-25 18:30]:
> > > Maybe there should be a special gadget, case*, which iterates case
> > > analysis.
> >
> > I'm in favor. Let's call it  'staircase to earth'. It takes patterns
> > to the ground.
> 
> So tell  me this, how would  you calculate the type  and definition of
> the elimination  operator case*  from the  definition of  the datatype
> over which it operates?

I can't answer this. See, partly my question was caused by the fact that
- like you mentioned  in the tutorial - for some i:Fin n  case on n will
just tell if there's a construction or not, but not which one.
On the other hand, doesn't fixing n  turn Fin n into an enumerated type?
This  is impractical,  but  why  shouldn't give  case  on  i the  ground
patterns  for the  inhabitants of  its type  (supposed its  index is  in
normal form)?

Best regards,
Sebastian

Reply via email to