I can't understand most of what you're saying. But since you're talking about stronger typing than what most languages can do, let me try to take it apart on a different thread.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 7:05 AM, Matt Rice <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 1:04 AM, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 2:52 AM, Matt Rice <[email protected]> wrote: >>> http://lucacardelli.name/Papers/PhaseDistinctions.A4.pdf >> >> I started reading this, but it's hard to take seriously, since it's so >> old, and it starts by seeming to say that dependent type systems lack >> a phase distinction, and thus can't be compiled. > > Indeed, i mainly intended for it to use for relating to its > definitions but it's "type system, which will serve as a utopic > goal;" seems a good reference point, since it does not differentiate > between compile-time and run-time values, so not so much the argument > the paper is making, but the generic environment in which it presents > its arguments. Hmm. Well I don't know about that, but sometimes I think it would be nice if this mailing list had a glossary. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
