Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Dynamic typing (part 3)
Message-ID: <-B0A9_3@xds13.ferranti.com>
Date: 15 Mar 91 16:31:36 GMT
References: <626@optima.cs.arizona.edu> <1991Mar14.183323.27020@engage.enet.dec.com> <24547:Mar1506:28:2591@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 11

In article <24547:Mar1506:28:2591@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
> No, you're wrong. Suppes, for example, defines functions so that you can
> say ``The set of x such that exp(x) is smaller than or equal to zero is
> empty.'' You don't have to qualify x as ``x in the reals'' for the
> statement to make sense and be perfectly correct.

That's because "real exp(real);" is programmed into everyone's head. If
you have "complex y;" then "y <= 0;" is a syntax error.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  `-_-'  peter@ferranti.com
+1 713 274 5180.  'U`  "Have you debugged your wolf today?"