From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <lambda.q.q@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DABA7EE20
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 04:17:17 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  lambda.q.q@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.215.54;
  receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="lambda.q.q@gmail.com";
  x-sender="lambda.q.q@gmail.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of
  lambda.q.q@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.54 as permitted
  sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.215.54;
  receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="lambda.q.q@gmail.com";
  x-sender="lambda.q.q@gmail.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@mail-la0-f54.google.com) identity=helo;
  client-ip=209.85.215.54;
  receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="lambda.q.q@gmail.com";
  x-sender="postmaster@mail-la0-f54.google.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Am4DABNepFDRVdc2k2dsb2JhbABEhVa9aQgjAQEBAQkJFBQEI4IeAQEEAScTBgE4AQMMAQUFISUPAQQgAQUBNYd5AwkGBAedFI8rhRAnDYlOAQUMjyaDJwOIVIl2gzKBHI1GP4FYgj4
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.83,254,1352070000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="181561166"
Received: from mail-la0-f54.google.com ([209.85.215.54])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 15 Nov 2012 04:17:16 +0100
Received: by mail-la0-f54.google.com with SMTP id j13so1562184lah.27
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:17:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date
         :message-id:mime-version:content-type;
        bh=y5Lwf1kLs2aMJ/hDfVNNiNnRe270vktdx8FXxvRfddU=;
        b=zcAdc5arz8iKAbrxK7Kv9qOg1uHICKLy61oWFnQMTily0VtbAxA2J1B7uUtrX1JlEw
         NQWSDjhtt2/tfxWYjLOwW0vFNa52nBrYeOhSMuqK85vlaOadF4i0LlIdMiMP8fIZiGtq
         WRga9VkU/0obpfAy81Au3R13ZnDnITZ7PuyGtND5knPRC3rQo6MeXSlJj38J7OtkQ61A
         /KeTN319roGj4GZdmQ/ooTzrReTfTeGxXOZEO19HiS6h1d1bP46R5VmSOQwmHDDRCJXZ
         B1x+LiY0cIaTnym+O3W8cVEtaS4AH0ABai/Kmbqd+YIwJ1jsMT51Xo6xAfco97zjD7iG
         Q4zQ==
Received: by 10.112.25.166 with SMTP id d6mr49013lbg.55.1352949436017;
        Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:17:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from golf.niidar.ru.niidar.ru ([178.176.225.185])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id sy1sm5669278lab.16.2012.11.14.19.17.13
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:17:14 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Ivan Gotovchits <lambda.q.q@gmail.com>
From: Ivan Gotovchits <ivg@ieee.org>
To: oleg@okmij.org
Cc: Didier.Cassirame@gmail.com,  caml-list@inria.fr
In-Reply-To: <20121113081952.36138.qmail@www1.g3.pair.com> (oleg@okmij.org's
	message of "13 Nov 2012 08:19:52 -0000")
References: <20121113081952.36138.qmail@www1.g3.pair.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 07:17:06 +0400
Message-ID: <874nkrlfm5.fsf@golf.niidar.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: [Caml-list] Re: Higher order functors over tuples

oleg@okmij.org writes:

>
> Well, if we re-write it in object style, but without objects, we obtain
>
>     type 'r stream_v = EOF | Stream of 'r option * 'r stream
>     and 'r stream = unit -> 'r stream_v
>
> which is what it says. Here's the important paper that describes the
> pattern in great detail and with many applications:
>
> 	Duncan Coutts and Roman Leshchinskiy and Don Stewart
> 	Stream Fusion. From Lists to Streams to Nothing at All
> 	ICFP 07
> 	http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.104.7401
>
> Incidentally, iteratees are somewhat similar.
>
Many thanks! This is what I was searching for.