David Hopwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dirk Thierbach wrote:
That's interesting, but linear typing imposes some quite severe
restrictions on programming style. From the example of 'h' on page 2,
it's clear that the reason for the linearity restriction is just to
ensure polynomial-time
David Hopwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marshall wrote:
David Hopwood wrote:
A type system that required an annotation on all subprograms that
do not provably terminate, OTOH, would not impact expressiveness
at all, and would be very useful.
Interesting. I have always imagined doing this by
Dirk Thierbach wrote:
David Hopwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marshall wrote:
David Hopwood wrote:
A type system that required an annotation on all subprograms that
do not provably terminate, OTOH, would not impact expressiveness
at all, and would be very useful.
Interesting. I have always
David Hopwood wrote:
Marshall wrote:
David Hopwood wrote:
A type system that required an annotation on all subprograms that do not
provably terminate, OTOH, would not impact expressiveness at all, and would
be very useful.
Interesting. I have always imagined doing this by allowing an
Marshall wrote:
David Hopwood wrote:
A type system that required an annotation on all subprograms that do not
provably terminate, OTOH, would not impact expressiveness at all, and would
be very useful.
Interesting. I have always imagined doing this by allowing an
annotation on all
