Re: Notions of Type

Bob Badour wrote:
> Marshall wrote:
> >
> > In fact, I lack a pithy definition of algebra. (And worse, there are
> > many senses of the word.) But one thing is common, and that
> > is a datatype and binary operators that are closed over that
> > datatype. Sometimes associativity of those operators is
> > considered a requirement, but it seems a distant second
> > to closure.
>
> Why binary? I sincerely doubt that requirement.

I wouldn't call it a requirement; I've just noticed it as a common occurance. There is also the occasional unary operator, such as NOT in the boolean algebras. I can't think of any trinary operators off hand.

Marshall Received on Fri Aug 18 2006 - 19:48:55 CEST