Re: Restrictable Primitives?
- From: MoeBlee <jazzmobe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:06:33 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 11, 11:02 am, Zaljo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
When you say '...we don't want to do that' , it gives me the
impression
that this can be done, but it is not prefered.
What I mean is that IF you FORMALLY do it, then you have to devise a
very different approach to first order languages. There'll be a lot of
details that you'll have to show how to work out. Primarily, you'll
have to devise an alternative to the usual recursive defintion of
'term' and to the usual recursive defintion of 'satisfaction'.
MoeBlee
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Restrictable Primitives?
- From: Zaljohar
- Re: Restrictable Primitives?
- References:
- Restrictable Primitives?
- From: Zaljohar
- Re: Restrictable Primitives?
- From: MoeBlee
- Re: Restrictable Primitives?
- From: Zaljohar
- Restrictable Primitives?
- Prev by Date: Re: Godel's comments about the "true reason" for incompleteness
- Next by Date: Re: Restrictable Primitives?
- Previous by thread: Re: Restrictable Primitives?
- Next by thread: Re: Restrictable Primitives?
- Index(es):