caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Hurt <bhurt@janestcapital.com>
To: skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Andrej.Bauer@andrej.com, Simon Frost <sdfrost@ucsd.edu>,
	caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Equality of functional values
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 09:21:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45BF546A.1040407@janestcapital.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1170165303.6391.20.camel@rosella.wigram>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2124 bytes --]

skaller wrote:

>On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 14:24 +0100, Andrej Bauer wrote:
>  
>
>>Simon Frost wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>I'm trying to use a software package written in ocaml (IBAL), however,
>>>it fails a test due to 'Fatal error: exception Invalid_argument("equal:
>>>functional value"). It seems that equality isn't defined for functional
>>>values in OCAML (although I'm not an expert), so I'm wondering what the
>>>workaround is.
>>>      
>>>
>>This may not sound very helpful, but: you are doing something wrong if 
>>you need to rely on equality of functions. Equality of functions is not 
>>computable.
>>
>>A suitable workaround would be to tell us what it is that you are doing, 
>>and we will tell you what to use instead of functions (if possible). To 
>>give you an idea of what you I am talking about:
>>
>>Suppose you came to us and complained that you cannot compare 
>>polynomials with integer coefficients, and it turned out that you 
>>represent polynomials as functions. We would then tell you not to do 
>>that, and represent polynomials as arrays (or lists) of coefficients, or 
>>objects, or some other data structure that is equipped with decidable 
>>equality.
>>    
>>
>
>Actually the idea 'equality of functions is not computable'
>is misleading .. IMHO. Equality of programmer written
>'functions' should always be computable: more precisely one hopes
>every function could have a mechanically verifiable proof
>of correctness and wished programming languages provided an 
>easy way to prove one.
>  
>

The problem is that "programmer written functions" are a subset of all 
possible functions.  Consider the three following expressions:

let f x = x + 3 in f

let f x y = x + y in (f 3)

let o = object method f x = x + 3 end in o#f

All of these expressions have type int -> int and thus are functions (in 
the general sense).   At which point the naive question becomes why they 
aren't comparable?

Worse yet, all three are "equal" in the sense that for all ints, when 
called with the same argument they will return the same value.

This problem is trickier than it looks at first glance.

Brian


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2668 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2007-01-30 14:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-01-29 21:04 Simon Frost
2007-01-29 21:11 ` [Caml-list] " Tom
2007-01-29 21:23   ` Brian Hurt
2007-01-29 21:59 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2007-01-30  8:17   ` Christophe Raffalli
2007-01-30  8:45   ` David MENTRE
2007-01-30 13:24 ` Andrej Bauer
2007-01-30 13:55   ` skaller
2007-01-30 14:21     ` Brian Hurt [this message]
2007-01-30 15:21     ` Jeff Polakow
2007-01-30 15:49       ` Jacques Carette
2007-01-30 17:23         ` Chris King
2007-01-30 20:18           ` Tom
2007-01-30 20:30             ` Gerd Stolpmann
2007-01-30 20:41               ` Fernando Alegre
2007-01-30 21:01                 ` Christophe TROESTLER
2007-01-30 21:08                   ` Tom
2007-01-30 21:46                     ` Christophe TROESTLER
2007-01-30 22:05                       ` Fernando Alegre
2007-01-30 23:13                         ` skaller
2007-01-30 23:06     ` Andrej Bauer
2007-01-31  0:15       ` Jacques Carette
2007-01-31  7:03         ` Stefan Monnier
2007-01-31 12:54           ` [Caml-list] " Jacques Carette
2007-01-31  0:15       ` [Caml-list] " skaller

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=45BF546A.1040407@janestcapital.com \
    --to=bhurt@janestcapital.com \
    --cc=Andrej.Bauer@andrej.com \
    --cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
    --cc=sdfrost@ucsd.edu \
    --cc=skaller@users.sourceforge.net \
    /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).