yeah, if field names are actually named entities, that problem goes away, altho I suppose it raises the question of where those are defined… who namespaces the namespaces themselves? quis namespa… you know what, never mind the mock-latin
Conversation
Yeah! It gets a bit weird! Clojure lets you have ‘namespaced symbols’ but that requires a top level namespace thingy. Where as I would love to be able to get rid of the top level ‘command’ language (like in Dhall and Nix)
1
2
Wish I understood levitation at this point - I think it lets you bootstrap datatypes inside the system itself, which feels possibly reminiscent?
3
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Not seen this one actually! Wondering what bits of a language could be considered 'coeffectful' if anything? Records perhaps?
2
Still trying to get my head around this mysterious yet tantalizing thingy: ncatlab.org/nlab/show/nece
2
like, what are records, telescopes, and functions actually doing? 😳 - somehow a record field is 'stronger' than a function parameter - ie. a function can be constructed even if there is no way of providing a parameter, where as a record kind of *insists* that a field is present.
2
1
yeah, assuming strict records - they make me feel a bit more comfortable if I'm honest 😅
totes. plus in a dependently-typed lang, you’re probably total, so you don’t need CPOs for the semantics to work; you can just work with sets
1