At 09:24 PM 5/28/2001 -0400, Mark Carroll wrote:
G |- f :: all x::S . T G |- s :: S -------------------------------------- G |- f s :: [s/x]T
I'm far from the right person to have a go, but while we're waiting for someone who knows what they're talking about:
:) Thanx.
"I bet ...", "My impression of it is rather like ...", "..., but clearly that's not quite right or ...", "... might be ...", "... means, probably, ..."
I hope that's a start.
Ufff... O:-) Sorry for pointing this out, but I couldn't resist. No offense intended. I actually appreciate your response. Really, I mean it. But it's not quite what I was looking for O:-) Anyway, I just saw that I had another reply (this on direct email, not posted to the list) with more info, so if you (or anyone) wants it just ask. Anyway, as the helpful person said about the expression above, "It's a theorem, really". Any more takers? I still don't have any pointers to literature where this theorem notation is explained more fully, and I'd really like to have some. Salutaciones, JCAB --------------------------------------------------------------------- Juan Carlos "JCAB" Arevalo Baeza | http://www.roningames.com Senior Technology programmer | mailto:jcab@roningames.com Ronin Entertainment | ICQ: 10913692 (my opinions are only mine) JCAB's Rumblings: http://www.metro.net/jcab/Rumblings/html/index.html