On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 8:17 AM, oldk1331 <oldk1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> The grammar for 'reduce': "func"/[args] >>> is not only very strange, but also not applicable in interpreter. >>> >>> I don't think it's worth the effort that compiler supports this grammar, >>> because it should be easilly replaced by "reduce(func, args)", >>> so I want to remove this grammar eventually. >>
+1 >> ATM "func"/[args] notation has one big advantage: it does not create >> an intermediate list. So it is more efficient than 'reduce(func, args)' >> variant. Supporting it in compiler in a sense is almost trivial: >> most of code is present anyway to support '[i for i in l]' construct. > > OK, if the reason for this grammar is to optimize cases like > > func/[f(x) for x in g] > > then we can come up with a function called "mapreduce" > > mapreduce(func, f, g) > > to avoid this special compiler treatment. Also this style is > more functional than imperative. > +1 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FriCAS - computer algebra system" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fricas-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to fricas-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
