Closed zenna closed 3 years ago
The problem, presumably, is that when we evaluate (a => (a +ₚ 10.0))
, the a
in a +ₚ 10.0
will be evaluated with the intervention again, leading to infinite regress!
We don't want to say evaluate a
with no interventions, because there may be some other important interventions at play
We might want to say evaluate but remove this particular intervention?
Alternatively:
Perhaps
c |ᵈ (a => (a +ₚ 10.0))
should first evaluate (a +ₚ 10.0) and then x
I think, but am not certain this should be well defined