Hello, again > It's ok, but way should we require the dummy variable 't' when we can > operate directly on functions with the higher-order function > 'product'? I think > > t +-> [|wholePart t, sin t|] > > is just a slightly awkward way to write: > > product(wholePart,sin)
Is it the reason why you want a ?function? product (A->X, A->Y, ...) ? > > > It's a good thing that record will remain mutable and the other > > structure product won't be mutable. So there is no ambiguity. > > > > Maybe there should be both 'Record' and 'Record!' where as usual the ! > denotes mutability? > I'm mot sure : mathematics don't speak about record but product or << couples or triplets or n-uplet in French >> or Tupple ? And Record! is the most logic, but perhaps not usable because everybody think << Record >>. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
