On 26 Feb 2008 14:44:42 +0100, Martin Rubey wrote:
>
> 1) It could happen that the code inside the brace might be
> computer generated. For that, it, is nicer to have "uniform"
> semantics.
>
I think uniform semantics are *always* nicer.
> 2) I find
>
> [{{x := f i; x+x^2+x^3}} for i in 1..10]
>
> as notation for a list of sets confusing.
>
> 3) What would {1,2,3} stand for: a (singleton) set of tuples or a set of
> integers?
What Gaby stated is that '{1,2,3}' is treated by the compiler (and the
interpreter?) as a call to an operator called 'brace', i.e.
brace(1,2,3)
So whatever the operator 'brace' returns in this context is what
'{1,2,3}' stands for.
> I guess that this can be resolved by assigning a precedence
> to the brace, but I'd rather stay with Aldor...
>
> %1 >> #include "aldor"
> Comp: 70 msec, Interp: 10 msec
> %2 >> #include "aldorinterp"
> Comp: 30 msec, Interp: 0 msec
> %3 >> import from Integer
> Comp: 10 msec, Interp: 0 msec
> %4 >> {1,2,3}
> () @ AldorInteger, AldorInteger, AldorInteger
> Comp: 0 msec, Interp: 10 msec
>
Again, doesn't this depend on the context in Aldor?
Regards,
Bill Page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
open-axiom-devel mailing list
open-axiom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
