Re:Where is the CRDT for syntax trees
by kazinator on Saturday December 04, 2021 @05:37AM
(#29440003)
OK, so without the semantics, the data is syntax.
So there we have the CRDT for syntax; it's every CRDT.
Every type has shapes, which are syntax, and those are invariant, as are some other constraints which can be shoehorned into syntax. E.g we can make it a matter of syntax, not semantics, that in {3, "foo", bar, 3.14}, the 3 must be the count of the remaining elements.
So there we have the CRDT for syntax; it's every CRDT.
Every type has shapes, which are syntax, and those are invariant, as are some other constraints which can be shoehorned into syntax. E.g we can make it a matter of syntax, not semantics, that in {3, "foo", bar, 3.14}, the 3 must be the count of the remaining elements.