Jan-Willem Maessen wrote:
On Apr 11, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
Yes, I realize than dynamic idempotence is not the same as
cycle detection. I still worry. :)
I think expectance is in the eye of the beholder. The reason
that (the pure subset of) pH was a proper implementation of
Haskell was because we were not over-specifying the semantics
originally. I would hate to do that now.
Though, to be fair, an awful lot of Prelude code didn't work in pH
unless it was re-written to vary slightly from the specification. So
the assumption of laziness was more deeply embedded than the spec was
willing to acknowledge.
-Jan-Willem Maessen
Well, if the pH scheduler had been fair I think the Prelude functions
would have been semantically correct (but maybe not efficient).
-- Lennart
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
