On 18 September 2012 18:27, <[email protected]> wrote: > > There has been a recent discussion of ``Church encoding'' of lists and > the comparison with Scott encoding. > > I'd like to point out that what is often called Church encoding is > actually Boehm-Berarducci encoding. That is, often seen > >> newtype ChurchList a = >> CL { cataCL :: forall r. (a -> r -> r) -> r -> r } > > (in http://community.haskell.org/%7Ewren/list-extras/Data/List/Church.hs ) > > is _not_ Church encoding. First of all, Church encoding is not typed > and it is not tight. The following article explains the other > difference between the encodings > > http://okmij.org/ftp/tagless-final/course/Boehm-Berarducci.html > > Boehm-Berarducci encoding is very insightful and influential. The > authors truly deserve credit. > > P.S. It is actually possible to write zip function using Boehm-Berarducci > encoding: > http://okmij.org/ftp/ftp/Algorithms.html#zip-folds
You have one too many "ftp/" in there (in case others get confused about why the link fails). > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic [email protected] http://IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
