|Reference to "First-Class Data Type" firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-02-18)|
|re: First-class data types email@example.com (1992-03-05)|
|Re: First-class data types firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-03-05)|
|Re: First-class data types email@example.com (Raul Deluth Miller-Rockwell) (1992-03-06)|
|Re: First-class data types firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-03-06)|
|Re: First-class data types email@example.com (1992-03-05)|
|Re: First-class data types firstname.lastname@example.org (Norman P. Graham) (1992-03-11)|
|First class data types [summary] email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-03-31)|
|From:||email@example.com (Bill Torcaso)|
|Organization:||C Programming Services, Inc.|
|Date:||Thu, 5 Mar 1992 13:37:17 GMT|
There is a nit to pick with the definition of 'first class datatype'
that asserts any operation can be applied to any object of any first class
datatype. Consider a language in which functions are first-class:
What is the XOR of two functions? What is the AND of two functions?
What is the function-invocation of the integer constant 17? Of the
floating-point constant 0.5?
Any language that admits arithmetic types and arithmetic operations will
have a hard time supporting first-class types. And of course, once you
subset the domain of datatypes and the operators that apply in each
sub-domain, the definition loses all generality.
-- Bill Torcaso
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.