On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:16 PM, William ML Leslie < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 17 February 2015 at 06:54, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > What I was trying to say is that when all functions are arity-1 >> > the compiler never needs to insert lambda wrappers to turn curried >> > application into intermediate function calls that accumulate the >> arguments. >> >> Oh! OK, I understand now. So in other words, because curried >> applications are only allowed on functions that are natively curried, >> the compiler doesn't need to generate lambdas to curry them. >> > > I think I missed something. Wasn't the issue that the lambdas introduced > allocation? Natively curried functions typically do the same, right? So > what problem is this solving? > If all procedures have arity 1, then curry-style application is only legal where a procedure returns a lambda explicitly. The key word here being "explicitly". shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
