From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: by pauillac.inria.fr; Tue, 18 Oct 94 11:43:50 +0100
Received: by pauillac.inria.fr; Tue, 18 Oct 94 11:42:54 +0100
From: Pierre Weis <weis@pauillac.inria.fr>
Message-Id: <9410181042.AA00330@pauillac.inria.fr>
Subject: Question point fixe
To: caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 11:42:54 +0100 (MET)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: weis@pauillac.inria.fr

From: Vincent Poirriez
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 94 09:43:00 +0100
To: caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr
Subject: Question point fixe


Ci-dessous une question dont j'ai oublie' la reponse:

Pourquoi n'a t'on pas le droit d'e'crire:

let build f =
 let g x = expr       (* ou` l'on fait appel a` f *)
  in
  function y -> expr' (* ou` l'on fait appel a` g *)
;;
let rec monf = build monf;;

L'intere^t de cette e'criture serait d'effectuer les 
calculs possibles par l'application partielle alors que
l'ecriture autorise'e:
 let rec monf x = build monf x;;
ne les effectue pas

Vincent
(Vincent.Poirriez@inria.fr)

(*I Hope my english isn't too bad*)   
Here after, a question that I don't remember the answer:

Why is it impossible to write:
let build f =
 let g x = expr       (* where f is called *)
  in
  function y -> expr' (* where g is called *)
;;
let rec monf = build monf;;

The interest of such a definition is to perform some
calculus in the partial application. These calculus
are not performed in the following allowed definition:
 let rec monf x = build monf x;;

Vincent
(Vincent.Poirriez@inria.fr)