Semantics of signum
Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
10 Feb 2001 17:55:32 GMT
Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:25:46 -0500, Dylan Thurston <firstname.lastname@example.org> pisze:
> Can you elaborate? What do you mean by signum for functions?
> The pointwise signum?
> Then abs would be the pointwise abs as well, right?
> That might work, but I'm nervous because I don't know the semantics
> for signum/abs in such generality.
For example signum x * abs x == x, where (==) is not Haskell's
equality but equivalence. Similarly to (x + y) + z == x + (y + z).
If (+) can be implicitly lifted to functions, then why not signum?
Note that I would lift neither signum nor (+). I don't feel the need.
It can't be uniformly applied to e.g. (<) whose result is Bool and
not some lifted Bool, so better be consistent and lift explicitly.
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk * email@example.com http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/
^^ SYGNATURA ZASTĘPCZA