On Wed, 21 Jan 2009, Kari Hoijarvi wrote: > Ganesh Sittampalam wrote: >> IIRC intentional programming did still have ordering, since (as you >> mention) the program was stored as a tree, rather than anything more >> complicated. >> >> I guess in principle you could store a program as a graph, though. >> > > Do you know the internals of the IP system? I would like to know more > about it for sure.
I was an intern on the project for about 6 months in total in 2000 and 2001. So yes, I have a reasonable knowledge of them, though it's a bit rusty. > Since the IP system replaced names in C code with generated primary key, I > would assume that the functions were internally in a lookup table, and > ordering was done separately, when the C code was generated frmo the tree. Nope - they were kept in what was essentially a syntax tree, although the leaves of the tree had graph like links to other bits of the tree, for example for referring to names in the way you describe. In general it would be difficult to go to a lookup table, particularly when implementing an existing language, because order can sometimes make a difference, so you would need to represent the necessary ordering constraints somehow. Cheers, Ganesh _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
