tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11295132.post4452702745640504871..comments2008-07-16T15:28:58.079-07:00sigfpehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08096190433222340957noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11295132.post-39468447862828581042007-01-18T10:53:00.000-08:002007-01-18T10:53:00.000-08:00A very small URL problem for " Free Differential Calculus".alpheccarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14645433315403867431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11295132.post-33311113553296431342007-01-18T07:19:00.000-08:002007-01-18T07:19:00.000-08:00I don't think there's no problem with T+T behaving differently from r+r. These operators aren't exactly the same thing because they're acting in different algebraic structures so I don't expect identical theorems about derivatives to hold in both. I'm just expecting to see some commonality of behaviour - just as there's some commonality between holes in types and ordinary calculus.sigfpehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08096190433222340957noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11295132.post-59188586694840925732007-01-18T04:07:00.000-08:002007-01-18T04:07:00.000-08:00There's a difference though between the "+" in regular expressions and the "+" in types: for a regular expression r, r+r=r, but for a type T, T+T=2T. I'm not sure if this could be a problem in your analogy.Bernhardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16337219205601326903noreply@blogger.com