Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:36:53 -0500 (EST)
> I hope I am not missing something obvious but why is N > 1. Why not implement
> Word1? Binary arithmetic is universally useful... just now I was trying to
> write the code to compute a binary determinant of a binary matrix but alas
> Word1 is not there. Maybe it was left out to keep it symmetric with the Int
> case when Int1 would not make much sence. But word1 does...
I don't see any reason to rule out word1 (or int1, for that matter). In
fact, it appears that the compiler handles word1; the primitive tycon
word1 is provided in the primitive environment and the rest of the
compiler is all nicely abstracted on word sizes.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a bug in the elaborator, because it does
val t : Word1.word = 0wx1
Error: z.sml 14.5.
Pattern and expression disagree.
in: (t): Word1.word = 0wx1
although it happily accepts
val t : Word1.word = Word1.fromLarge 0wx1