From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: discontinuous subtype without aspect
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:15:33 +0100
Date: 2018-01-30T19:15:33+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <p4qco6$1dk2$1@gioia.aioe.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 6972f8eb-6130-4c47-b27a-f8dd0afeb171@googlegroups.com
On 2018-01-30 18:31, Mehdi Saada wrote:
>> ...because people didn't want set constraints. I still fail to understand
> why, as you point out, a static predicate is not quite a replacement.
An arbitrary constraint does not preserve any properties of the type.
The only meaning of a constraint is to create an algebraic structure of
certain, provable or known properties. E.g. ranges keep the set of
values convex etc. Without properties advertised to the clients it is
just ad-hockery.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-30 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-28 14:45 discontinuous subtype without aspect Mehdi Saada
2018-01-29 23:24 ` Randy Brukardt
2018-01-30 17:31 ` Mehdi Saada
2018-01-30 18:15 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov [this message]
2018-01-30 22:09 ` Randy Brukardt
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox