We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Internally we have At for term-as-a-process and Ax for forwarders (axioms). Ideally I think Ax should disappear and become At (Def fwdName ...).
At
Ax
At (Def fwdName ...)
fwd
proc(cs...) fwd ... (cs...)
Now we have two forms of forwarders:
fwd <Nat> <Session> <Channel>
fwd <Session> ( <Channel>* )
The first form can be given a general type:
fwd : (n : Int)(S : Session) -> < Fwd n S >
The second is using a flat sequence of sessions and we cannot express this type as only Session is exposed and not [RSession].
Session
[RSession]
Therefor using the first form internally seems more appropriate.
The second form would then be a consequence of a more liberal form of term-as-a-process.
Note that so far what we have internally is the reverse the first form is a wrapper around the second.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
Internally we have
At
for term-as-a-process andAx
for forwarders (axioms). Ideally I thinkAx
should disappear and becomeAt (Def fwdName ...)
.fwd
in terms directly instead ofproc(cs...) fwd ... (cs...)
Now we have two forms of forwarders:
fwd <Nat> <Session> <Channel>
fwd <Session> ( <Channel>* )
The first form can be given a general type:
fwd : (n : Int)(S : Session) -> < Fwd n S >
The second is using a flat sequence of sessions and we cannot express this type as only
Session
is exposed and not[RSession]
.Therefor using the first form internally seems more appropriate.
The second form would then be a consequence of a more liberal form of term-as-a-process.
Note that so far what we have internally is the reverse the first form is a wrapper around the second.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: