Re: Curry Report Vers. 0.8.2

From: Bernd Brassel <bbr_at_informatik.uni-kiel.de>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:29:29 +0100

Michael Hanus wrote:
> I think it would be interesting to see your definition of (=:=)
> in terms of ($!!), since (=:=) does not always compute the normal
> form of both arguments (e.g., if one argument has no value).

I didn't. Just by USING ($!!) in one case as described.

> Why do you think it is "hopelessly inefficient"? Any conrete
> numbers from your implementation? I did this optimization you
> mentioned and it was an improvement of around 30% compared
> to the description of the Curry report. So, from my experience,
> I cannot say that this approach is "hopelessly inefficient".

Considering that binding of free variables is by far the most expensive
operation in the Haskell implementation, it would be surprising if it
was anything near your 30%. In Prolog free variables should be quite a
bit cheaper, I would assume, or don't you think?

Greetings
Bernd

_______________________________________________
curry mailing list
curry_at_lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/curry
Received on Fri Mar 24 2006 - 15:04:48 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Nov 11 2019 - 07:15:06 CET