On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 01:42:06 -0400 John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > Perry E. Metzger scripsit: > > > A +1 for switching to an operational semantics. It would be > > especially cool to develop an executable semantics... > > If we are to take the semantics seriously, I think it means > developing one whose soundness can be established with a proof > assistant. >
Agreed. (I had somewhat assumed it, in fact.) Perry -- Perry E. Metzger [email protected] _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
