Small point,
From: Thomas Davie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Functional vs Imperative
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:55:14 +0100
On 13 Sep 2005, at 14:45, Dhaemon wrote:
Hello,
I'm quite interested in haskell, but there is something I don't
understand(intuitively). I've been crawling the web for an answer, but
nothing talks to me...
So I was hoping I could find some help here:
"How is evaluating an expression different from performing action?"
I'm puzzled... Doesn't it amount to the same thing? Maybe I have a wrong
definition of "evaluating"(determine the value of an expression)?
Examples would be appreciated.
Also, just for kicks, may I had this: I read the code of some
haskell-made programs and was astonished. Yes! It was clean and all, but
there were "do"s everywhere... Why use a function language if you use it
as an imperative one?(i.e. most of the apps in http://
haskell.org/practice.html)
The difference is all about referential transparency -- in short, a
function given the same inputs will always give the same result. This is
not the same as in imperative languages, where functions/ methods/actions
can have 'side-effects' that change the behavior of the rest of the
program.
Take this example:
C program:
#define square(x) ((x) * (x))
#define inc(x) ((x)++)
int myFunc (int *x)
{
return square(inc(*x));
}
the C preprocessor will re-write the return line to:
return ((((x)++)) * (((x)++)));
Shouldn't that be:
return ((((*x)++)) * (((*x)++)));
this will be performed in sequence, so, x will be incremented (changing
the value of x), and that result will be multiplied by x incremented
again.
so if we run myFunc(&y), where y is 5, what we get is 5 incremented to 6,
and them multiplied by 6 incremented to 7. So the result of the function
is 42 (when you might reasonably expect 36), and y is incremented by 2,
when you might reasonably expect it to be incremented by 1.
Haskell program:
square x = x * x
inc = (+1)
myFunc = square . inc
and we now call myFunc 5, we get this evaluation:
myFunc 5 is reduced to (square . inc) 5
(square . inc) 5 is reduced to square (inc 5)
square (inc 5) is reduced to square ((+1) 5)
square ((+1) 5) is reduced to square 6
square 6 is reduced to 6 * 6
6 * 6 is reduced to 36
If you want to study these reductions on a few more examples, you might
want to download the Hat tracer, and use hat-anim to display reductions
step by step.
Bob
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN Search Toolbar now includes Desktop search!
http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
