---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ralf Hemmecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Oct 30, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: Re: [open-axiom-devel] [fricas-devel] Re: [fricas-devel] Re: iterators and cartesian product. To: Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi Bill, this goes offlist since I don't want to spam them... On 10/22/2007 08:06 PM, Bill Page wrote: > On 10/22/07, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Bill Page wrote: >> >> | As I said, I want >> | >> | Product(1..9,1..4) >> | >> | to be a domain - the cross-product of two other domains. >> >> I do not think >> >> I want 1..9 to be a domain so that I can write >> Product(1..9, 1..4) to be a cross product of two domains >> >> is an explanation of why `1..9' should be a domain. > > As I said earlier, I think the semantics of Product should be given > categorically by the existence of the unique operation > > Product(X:Type, Y:Type): with ... > > product: (A:Type, A->X,A->Y) -> (A->%) > > as a categorical limit. As you know I like the categorical approach, but I don't understand, what a definition like your "product" has anything to do with how the "for" loop is traversed? You certainly know that a function product: (A:Type, A->X,A->Y) -> (A->%) is easily implemented (in Aldor, I don't know for spad). But I really don't see the connection to the "for". Ralf ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ open-axiom-devel mailing list open-axiom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
