On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Daniel Fischer <daniel.is.fisc...@web.de>wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 25. Januar 2009 00:55 schrieb Conal Elliott: > > > It's obvious because () is a defined value, while bottom is not - per > > > definitionem. > > > > I wonder if this argument is circular. > > > > I'm not aware of "defined" and "not defined" as more than informal terms. > > They are informal. I could've written one is a terminating computation > while > the other is not. > Which definition(s) are you referring to? > > > > - Conal > I think I smell the same sort of circularity in this shifted "per definitionem" argument as well. Here's how I imagine making this implicit argument explicit: Define "terminating" (or undefined) to mean "/= _|_" and "not terminating" (undefined) to mean "== _|_". Then, since () is obviously terminating (defined), it follows that () /= _|_ . Is that the argument you had in mind? Does anyone see the flaw in that logic (and hence the purpose of "obviously"). - Conal
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
