> One thing I don't get: if HOL.eq is already taken, why not map the equality > symbol to something else?
Well, eq seems more natural when looking at the traditional xsymbol
syntax \<noteq> (although the corresponding abbreviation is named
not_equal). When using HOL.equal, there is always an uncertainty
whether its HOL.equal or HOL.equals. The existing HOL.eq_class.eq is so
special that I would not concede it any influence on the naming of a
fundamental HOL constant.
Of course I am open to other suggestions.
Florian
--
Home:
http://www.in.tum.de/~haftmann
PGP available:
http://home.informatik.tu-muenchen.de/haftmann/pgp/florian_haftmann_at_informatik_tu_muenchen_de
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Isabelle-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mailmanbroy.informatik.tu-muenchen.de/mailman/listinfo/isabelle-dev
