[Haskell-cafe] Re: Laws and partial values

[Conal Elliott]

On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Jonathan Cast <jonathanccast at fastmail.fm>wrote:

> On Sun, 2009-01-25 at 10:46 +0100, Thomas Davie wrote:
> > On 25 Jan 2009, at 10:08, Daniel Fischer wrote:
> >
> > > Am Sonntag, 25. Januar 2009 00:55 schrieb Conal Elliott:
> > >>> It's obvious because () is a defined value, while bottom is not -
> > >>> per
> > >>> definitionem.
> > >>
> > >> I wonder if this argument is circular.
> > >>
> > >> I'm not aware of "defined" and "not defined" as more than informal
> > >> terms.
> > >
> > > They are informal. I could've written one is a terminating
> > > computation while
> > > the other is not.
> >
> > Is that a problem when trying to find the least defined element of a
> > set of terminating computations?
>
> Yes.  If you've got a set of terminating computations, and it has
> multiple distinct elements, it generally doesn't *have* a least element.
> The P in CPO stands for Partial.
>
> jcc


and this concern does not apply to ()  .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20090125/60996df9/attachment.htm