[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, And Rosta wrote: > Xod: > #Anyway, whatever is in the 4th place of fancu needs to be interpreted as a > #function. If I stick "1" in there, it can only mean a function that > #returns "1" for all arguments, right? > > No. Like Jorge, I think that the bridi would be making the (false?) claim > that 1 is a function. [I know that on some stories, numbers or at least > the naturals are indeed defined as functions (though from what to > what, I can't remember), but I don't think that's pertinent to the current > discussion.) The function body goes in fancu4, whether that function expression is a transcendental trig function, a polynonial, or whatever. "1" is a perfectly legitimate polynomial of degree zero. Do I need to tag the fact that fancu4 is a function? -- The tao that can be tar(1)ed is not the entire Tao. The path that can be specified is not the Full Path.