caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Pierre Weis <pierre.weis@inria.fr>
Cc: "Daniel Bünzli" <daniel.buenzli@epfl.ch>, caml-list <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: lazyness in ocaml (was : [Caml-list] kprintf with user formatters)
Date: 23 Jul 2004 09:00:49 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1090537249.5870.168.camel@pelican.wigram> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040722182851.B18239@pauillac.inria.fr>

On Fri, 2004-07-23 at 02:28, Pierre Weis wrote:

> In my mind, this idea would be a type-based transformation of the
> source code. The typing rule for lazy function application would be:
> 
> |~ -: (f : 'a lazy -> 'b) (e : 'a)
> ----------------------------------  (lazy app)
>            |~ -: (f e : 'b)
> 
> and the transformation rule on the type annotated abstract syntax
> trees would be:
> 
> (f : 'a lazy -> b) (e : 'a) => (f : 'a lazy -> b) (lazy e : 'a lazy)
> 
> Interestingly enough, the typing rule implies that you not only can
> omit the lazy keyword at application time: it would be mandatory to
> omit it! Weel, not so bad, after all ...
> 
> This has to be precisely ruled out and the necessary proofs have to be
> made, but I think it could work (including for higher-order
> functional, map, fold, and so on). I mean, I don't see any trivial
> counter-example that would ruin this scheme. Wao! If this rule
> turned out to be usable, it would be a major improvement for lazy
> evaluation in our favorite language.

But this looks very dangerous!

Its kind of like reference parameters in C++, which make
it impossible to tell if  f(expr) can modifiy expr or not
[without finding which 'f' it is and examining it]

In the lazy case it would destroy an important identity:

f x <==> let x' = x in f x'

With your rule, the LHS might not evaluate x, whereas the RHS
would. Of course we already have that:

f x y <=/=> let x' = x in y' = y in f x' y'

since the RHS guarrantees x is evaluated before y,
whilst it happens by chance in the current Ocaml implementation
the reverse is true for the LHS.

So even if your rule is sound, it might not be a good idea
because it breaks 'the substitution principle'.

How about sugar:

\(expr) <==> lazy expr

Since arguments to be lazily evaluated are never variables,
they're often going to be surrounded in brackets already, 
and so this is only a single character .. 
a lazy way to spell lazy  .. and a very easy implementation :)

-- 
John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net



-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners


  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-07-22 23:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-06-30 16:32 [Caml-list] kprintf with user formatters Damien
2004-07-14 21:10 ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-15  0:17   ` Markus Mottl
2004-07-15  7:30     ` David MENTRE
2004-07-15  7:59       ` Jean-Christophe Filliatre
2004-07-15 23:35         ` henri dubois-ferriere
2004-07-15  7:39     ` Damien
2004-07-15 12:19       ` Markus Mottl
2004-07-15 12:42         ` Basile Starynkevitch [local]
2004-07-15 13:45           ` Markus Mottl
2004-07-15 14:22             ` Basile Starynkevitch [local]
2004-07-15 14:57               ` Markus Mottl
2004-07-16  6:47               ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-16  7:13                 ` Jean-Christophe Filliatre
2004-07-16  7:23                   ` henri dubois-ferriere
2004-07-16  7:44                     ` Jean-Christophe Filliatre
2004-07-16 17:56                   ` Markus Mottl
2004-07-19  9:17                   ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-19  9:32                     ` Jean-Christophe Filliatre
2004-07-16  7:21                 ` henri dubois-ferriere
2004-07-16 17:44                 ` Markus Mottl
2004-07-19 10:10                   ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-19 10:43                     ` Jon Harrop
2004-07-21 15:52                       ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-21 17:43                         ` lazyness in ocaml (was : [Caml-list] kprintf with user formatters) Daniel Bünzli
2004-07-22 16:28                           ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-22 17:03                             ` William Lovas
2004-07-22 23:00                             ` skaller [this message]
2004-07-23  3:32                               ` William Lovas
2004-07-28  7:26                               ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-28  8:06                                 ` skaller
2004-07-28  8:29                                   ` Daniel Bünzli
2004-07-28  9:13                                   ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-28  9:36                                     ` skaller
2004-07-28  9:38                                     ` skaller
2004-07-28 10:17                                 ` Jason Smith
2004-07-28 12:31                                   ` skaller
2004-07-21 20:41                         ` [Caml-list] kprintf with user formatters Jon Harrop
2004-07-22 15:39                           ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-22 22:16                             ` [Caml-list] lazy evaluation: [Was: kprintf with user formatters] skaller
2004-07-22 22:42                             ` [Caml-list] kprintf with user formatters skaller
2004-07-22  8:05                         ` [Caml-list] wait instruction lehalle@miriad
2004-07-22  8:40                           ` Olivier Andrieu
2004-07-22 10:35                             ` lehalle@miriad
2004-07-22 10:33                           ` Vitaly Lugovsky
2004-07-16  6:17             ` [Caml-list] kprintf with user formatters Pierre Weis
2004-07-16 17:14               ` Markus Mottl
2004-07-19 10:00                 ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-16  6:02       ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-16  8:42         ` Damien
2004-07-19  9:00           ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-16 16:52         ` Markus Mottl
2004-07-19  9:28           ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-15 22:20     ` Pierre Weis
2004-07-15 23:01       ` Markus Mottl
2004-07-16 16:17     ` james woodyatt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1090537249.5870.168.camel@pelican.wigram \
    --to=skaller@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    --cc=daniel.buenzli@epfl.ch \
    --cc=pierre.weis@inria.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).