5 Apr
2006
5 Apr
'06
11:34 a.m.
On Wed, 05 Apr 2006, Robert Dockins
So you think it would be clearer if I just ignored bottom as well?
It would be imprecise instead of wrong. :) Another option is to go for some sort of approximate semantics which still includes bottoms. You could for instance assume that bottom = const bottom, and state your results in that context. Verifying the results would still mean a lot of work, though. By the way, does your library have a QuickCheck test suite? In that case it is often not too hard to test properties involving bottoms. I have a library which may be of help: http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~nad/software/ChasingBottoms/docs/ -- /NAD