Re: [glas] pure algebraic concepts cfr additive
From: Toon Knapen (toon.knapen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-27 13:39:56
Peter Gottschling wrote:
>> I'm currently wondering if it's a good idea to consider AdditiveMagma
>> to be a refinement of the Magma concept.
> To have
> this property between AdditiveMagma and Magma we need an extra tool, the
> default functor. As I defined the concepts and the default functors,
> every type that models AdditiveMagma is always a model of Magma using
> the default functor.
Indeed, code that accepts a Magma will also accept an AdditiveMagma and
this is indeed the most important requirement.