From jjllambias@hotmail.com Mon May 22 12:37:42 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10986 invoked from network); 22 May 2000 19:37:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 May 2000 19:37:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.163) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 May 2000 19:37:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 98216 invoked by uid 0); 22 May 2000 19:37:41 -0000 Message-ID: <20000522193741.98215.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 12.128.10.26 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Mon, 22 May 2000 12:37:41 PDT X-Originating-IP: [12.128.10.26] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] More on lojban programatic semantics: Strong typing and inferencing of types Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 12:37:41 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la lojbab cusku di'e >The mekso grammar was specifically designed to allow such >overloading. Almost any grammatical construct can be converted into a >mekso component of some (probably appropriate) type. The converse is also true, of course. Any mekso can be converted into an ordinary grammatical construct, usually making much more clear what you're talking about. The usefulness of mekso has not yet been demonstrated. >In particular, there is no requirement that mekso operate on >numbers. String operations like concatenation certainly can be >expressed using mathematical language. Yes, and mathematical language is not restricted or required to be in mekso either. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com