On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 7:35 AM Norman Megill <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 1:01:56 AM UTC-4, Mario Carneiro wrote:
> ...
>
>>
>> I know, and this is a bigger issue for set.mm than in the mm0 databases
>> because these are smaller and more purpose driven. One reason I went with
>> _c notations for characters is because it is easier to read
>>
>
>> _h : _e : _l : _l : _o : __ : _w : _o : _r : _l : _d
>>
>> than
>>
>> 'h' : 'e' : 'l' : 'l' : 'o' : 'sp' : 'w' : 'o' : 'r' : 'l' : 'd'
>>
>
> Maybe I missed something in this thread, but what is the purpose of
> formalizing ASCII?  Is this something that eventually might be added to
> set.mm?.
>

I didn't explain this, but I am already using a formalization of ASCII in
MM0, for example
https://github.com/digama0/mm0/blob/master/examples/mm0.mm0#L405-L459 . As
you can see there, it is being used in order to define the input language
of MM0 so that I can make a claim about an MM0 verifier. While I have no
immediate plans to move this to set.mm, this is a possibility, and it also
shows an example of a mathematically reasonable use of ASCII formalization,
which may come up in set.mm in another form (e.g. metamath in metamath).

Our informal convention has been to prefix non-italic letters with
> underscore, like _i, so _<letter> will clash with a few that already
> exist.  How about a single quote prefix, 'a 'b 'c ... like in Lisp 'foo to
> abbreviate (quote foo)?  That would not clash with anything in set.mm
> except ''' in AV's mathbox (for alternate function value) which could be
> changed.
>
>     'h : 'e : 'l : 'l : 'o : 'sp : 'w : 'o : 'r : 'l : 'd
>

This also works for me. I don't think it is essential to commit to a
notation right now since I'm not actually adding these characters to set.mm,
but I wanted to make sure that others keep this use in mind.

Mario

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Metamath" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/CAFXXJSt%3DbAEt1c%3Dw8VbaTbC_aKcwQzuQR0_augvqyF_NUmVoyQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to