Gabriel Dos Reis
>
>
> Consider the definition of ModMonoid:
> --------------8<---------------8<----------------8<--------------
> )abbrev domain MODMON ModMonic
> ++ Description:
> ++ This package \undocumented
>
> ModMonic(R,Rep): C == T
>
<snip>
> Its description does not have a claim for "author", but the intersection
> of authors of domains using this domain leaves me with Johannes Grabmeier :-)
>
>
> ModMonic is not a builtin domain, therefore one needs a definition of its
> representation, i.e. a definition for "Rep", is needed. Yet, none is
> provided. Rather, "Rep" here is specified as a parameter to the functor.
> (That is not the same as defining it locally to some value)
Hmm, I am not sure what difference makes defining:
ModMonic(R,RepT): C == T
and later
Rep := RepT
but IMHO passing Rep as argument is resonable shortcut for the above.
If there are differences in behaviour I would rather change compiler
so that they agree.
BTW: AFAICS there is no need to have Rep at all -- all Rep does is
allowing magic coercions between % and Rep.
> Now, consider the capsule-level variable "power". It is declared as
>
> power:PrimitiveArray(%)
>
> then later assigned to as
>
> power := new(0,0)
>
> There are two lexical occurences of the literal '0' in there. Can you
> guess, which one is which? There are at least five interpretations for
> each constant:
>
> 0: R -- the parameter R satisfies Ring
> 0: Rep -- the parameter Rep satisfies UnivariatePolynomialCategory(R)
> 0: % -- the current domains satisfies same
> 0: NonNegativeInteger
> 0: Integer
>
Well, 'power' is declared to be of type 'PrimitiveArray(%)' so 'new'
should produce 'PrimitiveArray(%)' and compiler searches for it
in 'PrimitiveArray(%)'. And indeed, in 'PrimitiveArray(S)' we
have:
new : (NonNegativeInteger, S) -> %
So the first argument to 'new' must be 'NonNegativeInteger' and the
second must be '%'.
>
> That this domain compiles at all is mysterious; it happens to depend on
> a very obscure implementation detail of AXIOM compilers, one that is not
> advertised at all -- and I don't think it should.
> It is voodoo. So, I am calling it Johannes's Rep voodoo :-).
I would not call this voodoo: the compiler performs reasonable type
inference. Sometimes compiler works too much to make sense of
user input, but IMHO this is not the case.
--
Waldek Hebisch
hebi...@math.uni.wroc.pl
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
open-axiom-devel mailing list
open-axiom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
