Re: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell

[Jan Brosius]

Sorry, if in some way I have upset you
Sincerely
Jan Brosius

>From: Frank Atanassow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Frank Atanassow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 1:50 PM
>Subject: Fw: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell


> Frank Atanassow writes:
>  > Jan Brosius writes:
>  >  > > Why do some computer scientists have such problems with the good
logical
>  >  > > forall
>  >  > > and exist.  Remember that good old logic came first.
>  >  > > On it was build SET theory.
>  >  > > On it was built topological space
>  >  > >
>  >  > > To prove some theorem in lambda calculus one used a topological
model.
>  >  > >
>  >  > > You see : good old logic came FIRST  afterwards came theorems of
typed
>  >  > > lambda calculus .
>  >  > > This is not the sophistic question : what came first : the egg or
the
>  >  > > chicken.
>  >  > >
>  >  > > NO good old logic came first .
>  >
>  > Your argument is absurd and irrelevant.
>
> I take it back. There is no argument here, only the childish insinuation
that
> "my daddy can beat up your daddy".
>
> So there. <blfffft!>
>
> --
> Frank Atanassow, Dept. of Computer Science, Utrecht University
> Padualaan 14, PO Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, Netherlands
> Tel +31 (030) 253-1012, Fax +31 (030) 251-3791
>
>