On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 22:59 +0900, Sebastian Fischer wrote:
> So, for this construction to be useful, one should consider
> multiplicities of results such that (a ? a) is different from a.
This in turn conflicts with the law
s (a ? b) = s a ? s b
because by using it together with the definition
const x y = x
we can conclude:
a = const a failure
= const a (failure ? failure)
= const a failure ? const a failure
= a ? a
What a pity!
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
curry mailing list
curry_at_lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/curry
Received on Do Dez 16 2010 - 15:39:13 CET