From: Christophe Raffalli <christophe.raffalli@univ-savoie.fr>
To: Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@inria.fr>
Cc: sejourne_kevin <sejourne_kevin@yahoo.fr>, caml-list <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Request for complete pattern matching
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:56:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4384D785.5010106@univ-savoie.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051123183134.GB6446@yquem.inria.fr>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2640 bytes --]
>
> Well, I understand better and (as you may have guessed yourself!) I do
> not incline to adopt the idea.
>
> However provided you have some 'break' construct to transfert control to
> next matching, you can perhaps compile your construct by syntactic
> transformation.
>
>
> My idea is to transform your patterns into
> normal ones, replacing p <= e1 e2 ... en by fresh variables (say v)
> and then to match 'v e1 ... en' against p.
>
> Here you have :
>
> match e with
> | (v1, g) -> (match v1 0 with 0 -> g |_ -> break)
> | (f, v2) -> (match v2 0 with 0 -> f |_ -> break)
> | f, g -> fun x -> f x + g x
>
> At a little additional cost in complexity,
> you can replace 'break' (which does not exists) by exceptions as follows
>
> let x = e in
> try (match x with
> | (v1, g) -> (match v1 0 with 0 -> g |_ -> raise Exit)
> | _ -> raise Exit)
> with Exit ->
> try (match x with
> | (f, v2) -> (match v2 0 with 0 -> f |_ -> raise Exit)
> | _ -> raise Exit)
> with Exit ->
> (match x with f, g -> fun x -> f x + g x)
>
>
> I am not familiar enough with Camlp4, but I have the feeling
> that some purely syntactic compilation of your construct is doable.
> Since, only from the presence of <=,
> can you introduce the extra matchings and try .. with Exit)
> I am not saying it is easy, just that it looks feasible.
>
> Typing and warnings are yet another issue!
>
I agree that your translation works (I should try). I am just wondering
about the cost (compared to a reasonable implementation inside the
compiler) ?
That would probably be not so dramatic ... except I should not transform
pattern matching that do not use the new extension ... the camlp4 code
will probably tripple what I have.
Moreover, I think I may use camlp4 for bindlib-3.0, because this really
is an extension of the language and not a library ... however I do not
think camlp4 extensions are a good thing in general, because it breaks
readability of code.
So for my extension of pattern matching with function application, I
think, I prefer to wait an adoption of a similar feature rather than
doing it myself. bindlib-3.0 will be ok without this extention of the
pattern matching.
One of the reason for my post, is that I think pattern matching should
be complete (one of the reason, is because then you can interpret the
semantics of the language by the interaction of a constructor and a
destructor ... this has something to do with a lot of reasearch work in
computational interpretation of classical logic ... and trying to move
the language in this direction looks fun ..., for instance have a look
at Herbelin's work)
>
> -- Luc
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 894 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-23 20:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-22 22:43 Christophe Raffalli
2005-11-23 5:54 ` [Caml-list] " Luc Maranget
2005-11-23 14:37 ` Christophe Raffalli
2005-11-23 10:06 ` Michal Moskal
2005-11-23 15:26 ` Christophe Raffalli
[not found] ` <43842069.3070700@yahoo.fr>
2005-11-23 14:47 ` Christophe Raffalli
2005-11-23 18:31 ` Luc Maranget
2005-11-23 20:56 ` Martin Jambon
2005-11-23 21:30 ` skaller
2005-11-23 22:25 ` Martin Jambon
2005-11-24 9:29 ` Luc Maranget
2005-11-25 23:01 ` Martin Jambon
2005-11-23 20:56 ` Christophe Raffalli [this message]
2005-11-24 9:41 ` Luc Maranget
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=4384D785.5010106@univ-savoie.fr \
--to=christophe.raffalli@univ-savoie.fr \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=luc.maranget@inria.fr \
--cc=sejourne_kevin@yahoo.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).