Re: Name discussion for new primtive

From: Bernd Brassel <bbr_at_informatik.uni-kiel.de>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:32:07 +0100

German Vidal schrieb:
> I meant a 'purely functional' value, i.e., a constructor-rooted
> term. OK, then I could also find appropriate something like
> 'evalC' so that it's clear that a logical variable suspends.
>
> Nevertheless, I still prefer simply 'eval' (it would be more
> conservative for people from lazy functional programming), we
> just need to clearly state in the report that it evaluates its
> argument to a non-variable value, i.e., a constructor-rooted term.

I think the idea to call it something like eval is good. evalC, however,
could imply, like ground, that the value does not contain any logical
variables at all. But evalC [X] should not suspend.
Can we express this easily as well or do you think there will be no
misunderstandings?

_______________________________________________
curry mailing list
curry_at_lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/curry
Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 12:35:00 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Sep 20 2019 - 07:15:05 CEST