Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
> Sun, 06 Feb 2000 23:21:38 -0800, Jeffrey R. Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
>
> > If context reduction choses a more generic instance when a more
> > specific one exists, then I consider that a bug.
>
> <http://research.microsoft.com/users/simonpj/Papers/multi.ps.gz>
> Section 4.4
>
> Parts of context reduction must be deferred, contexts must be left
> more complex, which as I understand leads to worse code - only to
> make overlapping instances behave consistently, even where they are
> not actually used.
Parts of context reduction must be deferred, and contexts may be left more
complex. Yes. Overlapping instances come with that price. But the price isn't
really that high - and it's just the usual tradeoff of flexibility verses
`optimality'.
When you say: `even where they are not actually used', I'm not sure what you
mean. The deferred reduction only happens on classes with overlap. Classes
without overlap will be `eagerly' reduced.
--Jeff
