On 4/19/13 9:56 AM, glen wrote:
Hm. That sounds useful for my rhetoric. Is it published or at least
described anywhere? I can't find it on the SC11 site.
I have to open source some other code, so I'll throw that one on the
list too. It was an exhibit, not part of the technical program.
Ok, assertions can be added to check for expected constraints on mixed
sets or types can be grown to tolerate some or total mixing. Sort of the
same idea. But I now find I prefer the latter because it requires
explicit consent at compile time.
I infer you're talking about assertions in the code. I presume those
assertions could be promoted to objects or semi-independent "auditors"
and applied dynamically.
I'm contrasting compile-time assertions against run-time assertions, and
claiming the former is better when it can be achieved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspondence
Marcus
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
