Re: CoS and computability logic

>  Giorgi, would changing the way M is
> defined, in order for it to match BKS, make any semantic sense?

Not for me, the "from semantics to sytntax"-ist. The only compromise
I could go for is to further restrict the language, but right now I don't see an
interesting restriction, except perhaps the purely implicative fragment. For the latter,
however, I do have an answer: it is exactly the implicative fragment of affine logic (by
the way, I wonder if this is an officially known fact).

- Giorgi