Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007, Stephen Wilson wrote:
>
> | Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > | Here, % certainly satisfies the conditions on the parameter type:
> | > |
> | > | SetCategory with "*": (%,%)->%
> | >
> | > I don't think it does, in the sense of Spad.
> | > I believe two unnamed categories define distinct categories irrespective
> of
> | > their bodies.
> |
> | Are you saying that % is unnamed?
>
> `%' is not a category; it stands for the current domain.
>
> I'm saying that the category
>
> SetCategory with "*": (%,%)->%
>
> is unnamed.
Right. What I am saying is that in the type context
S : SetCategory with "*": (%, %) -> %
when % denotes MONAD, the category of % (its `principle category' as I
called it, since in the general case it is anonymous), satisfies the
context. Certainly MONAD has SetCategory and an export "*": (%, %) ->
%. The nominal/structural typing rules (not that I have tried to
define them formally) are just my way of thinking about the issue.
If this interpretation does not hold, what kind of expression could
possibly satisfy the context S above?
> I'm trying to find where I found that in the Axiom book, but no luck for the
> moment. Except the discussion in section 12.12 on Anonymous Categories.
As I said, I do not recall reading anything explicit on this point,
but I would be grateful if you can pull up a reference. I might take
a look in the Aldor user guide and see if there is mention there.
Steve
_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
