[BULK] Re: [plt-scheme] The perfect teaching language--Is this too much to ask for?

On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 11:10:26PM -0400, Stephen Bloch wrote:
> 
> On Jun 13, 2009, at 18:00, Shriram Krishnamurthi <sk at cs.brown.edu>  
> wrote:
> >
> 
> >The *type* of isinstance would be something like
> >
> > isinstance :: value x type -> boolean
> >
> >[Never mind that type should not be a type.]
> 
> I'm missing something.  Why shouldn't type be a type?

No good reason at all, unles syou're into formal logic and type theory, 
in which case you find there are metarecursive loopholes which admit 
infinite proofs and nonterminating programs.

So if you don't mind being able to write a nonterminating program 
occasionally, there's no particular reason why type shouldn't be a type.

-- hendrik