On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Keean Schupke <[email protected]> wrote:
> So maybe the co-monad approach is the best after all? > > Fn a b c -> Fn a b -> a > > Viewing a function as a datatype, that you cannot create (sounds about > right as we don't allow self-modifying code), that you can extract a value > from. The co-monadic extract being function application. The more I think > about this the more I like it, and it looks nice. > Given my [nearly] perfect ignorance of monads and co-monads, I'm enjoying a brief laugh at the idea that my need to solve a boringly mundane parse ambiguity may possibly turn out to produce something useful in the running type theory discussion. This is part of why I love this list. shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
