Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
RE: [Caml-list] Coinductive semantics
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@b...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Coinductive semantics
Don Syme wrote:

> To take a very non-serious example, think of the rules that parents lay
> down for their children (which are often recursively referential, let
> alone contradictory :-)).  Induction corresponds to "you may only do
> what follows from the rules", whereas co-induction corresponds to "you
> may do anything that is not excluded by the rules".  For an empty set of
> rules an inductive child can do nothing, a co-inductive child can do
> anything.  

My son is a coinductive child with a buggy rule evaluator ;)

Alex

-- 
*********************************************************************
http://www.barettadeit.com/
Baretta DE&IT
A division of Baretta SRL

tel. +39 02 370 111 55
fax. +39 02 370 111 54

Our technology:

The Application System/Xcaml (AS/Xcaml)
<http://www.asxcaml.org/>

The FreerP Project
<http://www.freerp.org/>