> But in this case unless we assert it, not every domain has Domain. That's true, but the only thing that must be extended is a few basic categories like, for example SetCategory.
> Declaring X:Domain or X:Domain with ..., or X:Join(Domain, ...) is > just making this assertion. It does not provide X with the > characteristics of an "object", which by definition is an instance of > some domain. > That category that plays this role in Axiom is called Type > (1) -> )sh Type > Type is a category constructor Hmmm, maybe I mix again Aldor and SPAD... See section 7.7 AUG: Type: A type S satisfies the language-defined type Type if S is the type of a domain or category. In other words, all domains and categories are types. Is this really different for SPAD? (I am not saying anything about the interpreter.) Is there a definition for SPAD somewhere besides the one given by ")sh Type"? > But the structure of Type is quite different than the structure of a domain. Sorry I don't know about the internals. Ralf ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ open-axiom-devel mailing list open-axiom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
