Back to the initial question. Does first-class object types mean the same as dependent types? In that case there is a wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependent_types that can serve (at least for me) as a starting point for the answer.
On Jul 29, 6:37 pm, Yrogirg <[email protected]> wrote: > For example having functions as first-class objects allows one to > straightforwardly deal with integral transforms (of type (Float -> > Float) -> (Float -> Float)). Although usually it is more preferable > for integral transforms to represent a Float -> Float function as an > array of values at points, the possibility is still rather neat. > > But what can be done with types being first-class objects? Are there > any math objects that can be easily dealt owing to that feature? > > Aldor user guide suggest an example that "shows how to swap structure > layers in a data type by using > higher order functions as parameters to a generic program". But it is > not right what I'm looking for. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FriCAS - computer algebra system" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel?hl=en.
