Commit e57a798a authored by Giuseppe Castagna's avatar Giuseppe Castagna
Browse files


parent 5c3137ba
......@@ -179,9 +179,9 @@ operator (more precisely, the same as the operator \textsf{pred} Kent defines in
5.7 of his dissertation), even though the two operators were defined independently from
each other. The exact definitions however are slightly different, since
the algorithm given in~\citet[Figure 5.2]{kent19phd}
for \emph{function application inversion} works only for functions
for \emph{function application inversion} is sound only for functions
whose type is an intersection of arrows, whereas our definition
of worra, given in~\eqref{worralgo}, works for any function, in
of worra, given in~\eqref{worralgo}, is sound and complete for any function, in
particular, for functions that have a union type, too. The main
difference of Kent's approach with respect to ours is that, since it
builds on the logical propositions approach, then it focus the use of
......@@ -665,7 +665,7 @@ the new contributions.
while the two alternatives used by refinement types preserve
Done (lines ??-??_
Done (lines ??-??)
......@@ -676,7 +676,7 @@ the new contributions.
also presents a set theoretic interpretation), thus a comparison is
Kim: far fetched?
In 3.3 it is mentioned that ``we are not aware of any study in this
......@@ -687,7 +687,10 @@ the new contributions.
The reviewer forgot to include the reference [5] in the report but
we are pretty sure that [5] must refer to ...
we are pretty sure that [5] must refer to ``Gradual Liquid Type
Inference'' (OOPSLA 2018). We were aware of this work of course
but we would not define it an example of integration of gradual
and occurrence typing ...
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment