Re: 3.20.2 Function application
Jay McCarthy
> Jay,
> I didn't know if this was too specific for the mailing list. I have labeled
> the sub-expressions with An.
> A4{fun {f : B1} : B2
> A5{fun {x : B3} : B4
> A6{fun {y : B5} : B6
> A1{cons x A2{f A3{f y}}}}}}
> Would A4, A5, and A6 be unnecessary because they are the same as the return
> types of the functions they label: B2, B4, and B6 respectively?
No, A4 is the label of the actual function. Its type is B1->B2
> Wouldn't this work it's way up with the body expressions and B2 would have
> the same type as it's body expression which is B4 which in turn would have
> the type of it's body expression which is B6 etc.?
> B2 = B4 = B6 = A1
Not exactly. A1 = B6, A6 = B4, etc but there is no relation between B6 and B4.
> Am I correct in thinking that none of these are function applications, just
> a nested function?
None of those are applications.
> Am I correct in thinking that these will all evaluate to [x] and list([x])?
Some will eval to list([x])
> I know we have to work it out with a long list of rules but I would like to
> understand what we're working towards a little better first.
np
Jay
> Karen
>
--
Jay McCarthy <j...@cs.byu.edu>
Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University
http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay
"The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93