[Haskell-cafe] Re: Paper draft: Denotational design with type class morphisms
Conal Elliott co...@conal.net wrote: DRAFT version ___ comments please Conal, please, PLEASE, never, EVER again use the word meaning if you actually mean denotation. It confuses the hell out of me, especially the (I guess unintended) connotation that you analyse the meaning of a particular instance's existence on a cosmic scale. Please. These things have neither purpose in life nor has their life any meaning, they just bleeding denote things. -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Paper draft: Denotational design with type class morphisms
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:17:14 +0100 Achim Schneider bars...@web.de wrote: Conal Elliott co...@conal.net wrote: DRAFT version ___ comments please Conal, please, PLEASE, never, EVER again use the word meaning if you actually mean denotation. It confuses the hell out of me, especially the (I guess unintended) connotation that you analyse the meaning of a particular instance's existence on a cosmic scale. It shouldn't confuse you. Using means for denotes, and likewise meaning for denotation, is correct English, and very common usage too. -- Robin ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Paper draft: Denotational design with type class morphisms
* Achim Schneider bars...@web.de [2009-02-20 15:17:14 +0100]: Conal Elliott co...@conal.net wrote: DRAFT version ___ comments please Conal, please, PLEASE, never, EVER again use the word meaning if you actually mean denotation. It confuses the hell out of me, especially the (I guess unintended) connotation that you analyse the meaning of a particular instance's existence on a cosmic scale. Please. These things have neither purpose in life nor has their life any meaning, they just bleeding denote things. The use of meaning in meaning of life is figurative / metaphorical, not literal; the literal meaning...uh...denotation is pretty much the same as what denotation means...uh...denotes. -- mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Paper draft: Denotational design with type class morphisms
Robin Green gree...@greenrd.org wrote: On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:17:14 +0100 Achim Schneider bars...@web.de wrote: Conal Elliott co...@conal.net wrote: DRAFT version ___ comments please Conal, please, PLEASE, never, EVER again use the word meaning if you actually mean denotation. It confuses the hell out of me, especially the (I guess unintended) connotation that you analyse the meaning of a particular instance's existence on a cosmic scale. It shouldn't confuse you. Using means for denotes, and likewise meaning for denotation, is correct English, and very common usage too. (length . denotations) to mean (length . denotations) to denote (read: to denote is more defined than to mean) Following your argument through, we should talk kinda like hey, we do something with that thingy to do that-other thingy to that thingy over there. 99% of my former teachers would tear you to shreds... in mid-air (during lift-off). I can't talk about the whole of English usage, but I never saw meaning in a mathematical context where denotation would work, too, except in Conal's writings. ...and that doesn't even include that my native language isn't English but German, in which to mean nounificates using another object: It translates to Opinion instead of Denotation. deuten (to intepret, to point) is a very well-defined concept in German and doesn't like to be messed with. -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Paper draft: Denotational design with type class morphisms
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Achim Schneider bars...@web.de wrote: Robin Green gree...@greenrd.org wrote: On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:17:14 +0100 Achim Schneider bars...@web.de wrote: Conal Elliott co...@conal.net wrote: DRAFT version ___ comments please Conal, please, PLEASE, never, EVER again use the word meaning if you actually mean denotation. It confuses the hell out of me, especially the (I guess unintended) connotation that you analyse the meaning of a particular instance's existence on a cosmic scale. It shouldn't confuse you. Using means for denotes, and likewise meaning for denotation, is correct English, and very common usage too. (length . denotations) to mean (length . denotations) to denote (read: to denote is more defined than to mean) Following your argument through, we should talk kinda like hey, we do something with that thingy to do that-other thingy to that thingy over there. 99% of my former teachers would tear you to shreds... in mid-air (during lift-off). I can't talk about the whole of English usage, but I never saw meaning in a mathematical context where denotation would work, too, except in Conal's writings. ...and that doesn't even include that my native language isn't English but German, in which to mean nounificates using another object: It translates to Opinion instead of Denotation. deuten (to intepret, to point) is a very well-defined concept in German and doesn't like to be messed with. The distinction is very clear in technical English but often disregarded in ordinary speech. http://consc.net/papers/intension.html is very informative. -gregg, your faithful half-baked philosophaster ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
