> | Note: This code is currently the same in both FriCAS and OpenAxiom.
>
> OpenAxiom issues this warning:
>
>Warnings:
> [1] OpenAxiom suggests removing assignment to Rep
Very nice.
> | Since BinarySearchTree is a particular class of BinaryTree for
> | consistency in BinarySearchTr
Bill Page writes:
| On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Bill Page writes:
| >
| > | Since BinarySearchTree is a particular class of BinaryTree for
| > | consistency in BinarySearchTree I would expect to see:
| > |
| > | ═Implementation == BinaryTree(S) add
| > | ═ ═Rep ==
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Bill Page writes:
>
> | Since BinarySearchTree is a particular class of BinaryTree for
> | consistency in BinarySearchTree I would expect to see:
> |
> | Implementation == BinaryTree(S) add
> | Rep == List Tree S
>
> As I said, I would
Bill Page writes:
| > | On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > | > If you're not proposing to export the Rep, then your proposal is a bit
| > | > obscure to me. Would you mind clarifying why the above does not
| > | > amount to exporting the Rep of SomeDomain?
| > | >
| > B
Bill Page writes:
| > | On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > | > If you're not proposing to export the Rep, then your proposal is a bit
| > | > obscure to me. Would you mind clarifying why the above does not
| > | > amount to exporting the Rep of SomeDomain?
| > | >
| > B
> | On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | > If you're not proposing to export the Rep, then your proposal is a bit
> | > obscure to me. Would you mind clarifying why the above does not
> | > amount to exporting the Rep of SomeDomain?
> | >
> Bill Page wrote:
> | Because it i
Bill Page writes:
| On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Your earlier suggestion
| >
| > Bill Page writes:
| > # On the other hand, if there is no OldDomain then it is necessary to
| > # specify the domain that will represent this new domain. We could do it
| > # like
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Your earlier suggestion
>
> Bill Page writes:
> # On the other hand, if there is no OldDomain then it is necessary to
> # specify the domain that will represent this new domain. We could do it
> # like this:
> #
> # Foo(...): with
>
