Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- From: Raffael Mancini <ramanci@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:44:06 +0100
Espen Vestre wrote:
Raffael Mancini <ramanci@xxxxxxxx> writes:What I was talking about are strictly mathematical function, but I
Huh?Well not every relation is a function, as relations can have more than
one results which is not allowed for functions. So functions are a
subset of relations.
You're both missing the point... Heck, I thought this was completely
obvious to any lisper (but I have to admit that I've probably got a
minor brain damage due to some exposure to axiomatic set theory and
lambda calculus)! What do you guys do when you encounter a relation
and need to implement a check for it? Run for help from the prolog
guys? I think not! You probably implement a in-my-relation-p
function. And there's my point: Any relation is also a function, but
of course a function with a different /range/, namely the set of truth
values {0, 1} (or {T,F}, (t nil) or whatever notation you like :)).
think I got your point.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- From: Espen Vestre
- Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- References:
- Lambda-calculus and lisp
- From: Raffael Mancini
- Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- From: Ken Tilton
- Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- From: Espen Vestre
- Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- From: Holger Schauer
- Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- From: Espen Vestre
- Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- From: Raffael Mancini
- Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- From: Espen Vestre
- Lambda-calculus and lisp
- Prev by Date: Re: Lisp article at IBM
- Next by Date: Re: Lisp article at IBM
- Previous by thread: Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- Next by thread: Re: Lambda-calculus and lisp
- Index(es):