"It follows naturally from the rule: (∃ T . F⟨T⟩) → R ≃ ∀ T . (F⟨T⟩ → R)" — Yup; that's about as natural as it gets.
-
-
-
Replying to @derKha
`impl trait`. Part of an argument that a single syntax can be used for taking/receiving a generic type that the caller/callee picks.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @JakeGoulding @derKha
I don't think mathematical arguments are out of place in an internal discussion on programming language semantics.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @glaebhoerl @derKha
Certainly, so long as all the important/relevant parties understand it.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
@Gankro It's kind of like choosing English as the lingua franca; any choice like that is going to exclude someone.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
My point was around the amusing math tendency to apply words that ascribe "easiness" to something that isn't.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This is something I try (and often fail) to reduce in my SO answers. It's not "obvious" if someone had to ask.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
And it's never "just" do thing_a. There's always context and background we take for granted.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.