[BULK] Re: [plt-scheme] The perfect teaching language--Is this
too much to ask for?
hendrik at topoi.pooq.com
hendrik at topoi.pooq.com
Sat Jun 13 23:32:26 EDT 2009
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 11:10:26PM -0400, Stephen Bloch wrote:
>
> On Jun 13, 2009, at 18:00, Shriram Krishnamurthi <sk at cs.brown.edu>
> wrote:
> >
>
> >The *type* of isinstance would be something like
> >
> > isinstance :: value x type -> boolean
> >
> >[Never mind that type should not be a type.]
>
> I'm missing something. Why shouldn't type be a type?
No good reason at all, unles syou're into formal logic and type theory,
in which case you find there are metarecursive loopholes which admit
infinite proofs and nonterminating programs.
So if you don't mind being able to write a nonterminating program
occasionally, there's no particular reason why type shouldn't be a type.
-- hendrik
More information about the plt-scheme
mailing list