Re: Proposal: Lazy matching for local patterns

From: German Vidal <gvidal_at_dsic.upv.es>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:10:46 +0200 (CEST)

Ops..

> When the evaluation of these variables is required, then I would
> expect that both functions behave the same way. And this will not
> happen if accessor functions are always rigid independently of the
> evaluation annotation of the function where the local declaration
> appears. For instance, if accessor functions are always rigid,
> then "foo undefined" suspends with the definition

I meant "foo z" (where z is a free variable).

> foo eval flex
> foo n = let (x,y) in [x,y]
>
> while it does not suspend with the definition
>
> foo eval flex
> foo (x,y) = [x,y]
>
> Thus I would prefer that accessor functions have the same
> evaluation annotation as the function where the local declaration
> appear. Of course, I have no idea whether it is easy or difficult
> to incorporate into existing compilers. Is there any special
> trouble here?
>
> Best,
> German
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> German Vidal
> DSIC - UPV, Camino de Vera s/n, E-46022 Valencia, Spain
> gvidal_at_dsic.upv.es
> http://www.dsic.upv.es/~gvidal
> --------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
curry mailing list
curry_at_lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/curry
Received on Thu Oct 25 2001 - 08:45:43 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Sep 23 2019 - 07:15:05 CEST