On Sunday 04 June 2006 10:28, Peter Jay Salzman wrote: > On Sun 04 Jun 06, 9:57 AM, Ken Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > On Sunday 04 June 2006 09:05, Peter Jay Salzman wrote: > > > On Sat 03 Jun 06, 10:27 PM, Ken Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > > Cue, the **Fundemental axiom of the C++ type system**, stated > > > > as follows: > > > > A* is automaitcally convertable to B* if and only if A is a > > > > B. (Likewise for pass by reference). > > > > > > > > (this is my own generalization though, and there may actually > > > > be exceptions) > > > > > > Although this was interesting to read, it doesn't say much other > > > than to restate my observation in a more sophisticated way. > > > > IMO, all that matters is that the axiom is the reason. > > > > --Ken > > BTW, you mentioned that it was a generalization of the fundamental > axiom of the C++ type system -- what is the fundamental axiom? That > sounds like something I should know, but I've never heard of it.
Oh. I didn't make that comment easy to parse, did I. The "fundemental axiom" is something I just named, based on observing this kind of behavior throughout the language. > BTW, "void *" seems to be an exception to the axiom: Maybe everything is a void. > Herr Godel would say that this type of thinking is why it took > humanity over 2000 years to discover non-Euclidean geometry. ;-) There are other languages that break the axiom, but they're just that: other languages. --Ken -- I usually have a GPG digital signature included as an attachment. See http://www.gnupg.org/ for info about these digital signatures.
pgpz0E3y5Lp5l.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list vox-tech@lists.lugod.org http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
