From rlpowell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca Sun May 21 20:06:36 2000
Return-Path: <rlpowell@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Received: (qmail 30654 invoked from network); 22 May 2000 03:06:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 May 2000 03:06:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca) (129.97.134.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 May 2000 03:06:36 -0000
Received: from calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA19855 for <lojban@egroups.com>; Sun, 21 May 2000 23:06:25 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200005220306.XAA19855@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
To: lojban@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] More on lojban programatic semantics: Strong typing and inferencing of types 
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com> of "Thu, 18 May 2000 06:34:12 PDT." <20000518133412.42223.qmail@hotmail.com> 
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 23:06:24 -0400
X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>

>la brukcr cusku di'e
>
>>On the other hand, "poi" implies that the characteristic named is an
>>*essential* aspect of the thing named - this is much closer to the
>>meaning of a type in a PL.
>
>I suggested {noi} because you called it an annotation,
>which I took to be some additional information about
>something already known. If you meant it to be a definition,
>then {poi} is better.
>
>>Ehm, I think a namcu is a valid mekso, but I wasn't (yet) talking about
>>type hierarchy - just giving multiple examples. These bridi were meant
>>to be examples of declarations.
>
>Ok. I don't really know what a mekso is. Is {li pa cu mekso}
>a sensible statement?
>
>>My understanding was that naclu (and the other similar gismu) followed a
>>sumti pattern of "x1 is <some kind of number> of value x2". So naclu
>>means that x1 is a rational, whose value is given by x2. So in the
>>example above, I would be saying that "la stokuot." is an *unspecified*
>>rational number. X2 is the value. So you could "initialize" a variable
>>at the same time by including x2.
>
>Interesting, but I'm not sure what goes in your x1.
>Not a value, but the name of a value?

rlpowell@calum> ll saclu 
saclu decimal
x1 (me'o) is the [decimal/binary] equivalent of
fractional x2 (me'o) in base x3 (quantity)

[conversion from fractions to decimal-point based
notation] (cf. namcu, frinu)
rlpowell@calum> ll me\'o 

me'o LI the mex
the mathematical expression (unevaluated); convert
unevaluated mathematical expression to sumti

So the x1 of saclu is a mathematical expression that we're converting from a
fraction. That seems to have nothing to do with variable declaration
to me.

Why not use the mekso variable declaration constructs?

-Robin

-- 
http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest.
... stripped of our uniqueness as human beings by Darwin, exposed to our
own inadequacies by Freud, ... Power -- "the ability to bring about our
desires" -- is all that we have left. --- Michael Korda, _Power!_

