Re: Classes / roles as sets / subsets

[Daniel Hulme]

 See diagram case 2 (Class A and Class B intersect):

   B are built from a role that represents their intersection ( Class
 A U  Class B), and then code is added in the definitions of the

It may be just me being confused, but the symbol that looks like a U
(U+222a) is usually union; intersection is the vertical reflection of
that (U+2229). I'm not trying to be picky, but if it's confused me, it's
probably confused someone else too.

All of which reminds me, I'm looking forward to being able to iterate
over my lists with \forall, \elem, and other set notation symbols rather
than having to spell stuff out. Perl up to 5 may be executable line
noise, but I can see Perl 6 being the closest thing yet to executable
maths, and I love it.

-- 
Always crash crash crashWell come on and let me know
You're happy when I'm running bash   Should I play or should I code?
One test is fine, next is black(with apologies to The Clash)
So if you want a dodgy hack  worse at http://surreal.istic.org/songs


pgpSXhIbc2Ap4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Classes / roles as sets / subsets

[Mark J. Reed]

On 8/29/06, Daniel Hulme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Perl up to 5 may be executable line
noise, but I can see Perl 6 being the closest thing yet to executable
maths, and I love it.



Funny, I could have sworn APL was the closest thing yet to executable maths.
( Hey, wait a minute, I'm American; make that executable math. )   I think
it's certainly closer than Perl6 will be.  And yet, for all the talk about
line noise,  APL makes even the worst perl3 code look positively legible
by comparison. :)

--
Mark J. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]