Matt:

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote:

> The dependently-typed languages I'm most familiar with, Coq and Agda,
> don't try to separate types and terms into sub-grammars...


That's more or less what I thought. But it creates some interesting
grammatical issues, notably at type-qualified expressions. If you have
something like

  expr ':' type

that can end up turning into

  expr : expr : type ...

and so forth. And there *are* things in the type language that are not
expressions. For example the names of the core types in the language. How
does agda resolve this sort of thing?


shap
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev

Reply via email to