"Bill Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > "Bill Page writes: | > ... | > | In the example code that I gave and in my emails I | > | have specifically stated that I think equality of functions in | > Axiom | should be changed so that it applies EQ after | > resolving the functions. | > | | On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: | > | > But the question is: Why doing that actually computes anything | > menaingful? What is the mathematical definition to measure that | > hack against? Where is that definition? | > | | I don't understand why this is difficult for you.
It probably is difficult because you have consistantly avoided to tell me what the definition of equality of function is, so that I check that the implementation does not something sensible. [...] | It seems clear to me that this requires a definition of function | equality that at least is consistent with the syntactical equality. Please, give me the semantics. I'm not talking syntax. | The current definition of '=' in Mapping fails because it depends on | the "state" of the function, i.e. whether it is fully resolve yet, or | not. | | Do you find anything unclear in this statement? Not unclear. Missing. And the circle continues. -- Gaby ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ open-axiom-devel mailing list open-axiom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
