[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.lang.functional: > > One of the most lucid explanations of definitional interpreters -- > > including those that are based on continuation-passing -- are > > explained in J. Reynolds' famous 1971 "Definitional Interpreters for > > Higher-Order Functions" paper. (It has been re-published in 1998 in > > HOSC.) The paper also explains how to perform defunctionalization, > > which can be seen as a way to compile (and even hand-compile) > > higher-order programs. > > Matthias, thanks for the reference, but I dont have access to an > engineering library. I would appreciate, if you have access to paper/ > scanner or electronic copy to help many of us out, you are > not just helping me but many will thank you.
If nothing else, please use Google. Many will thank you. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Definitional+Interpreters+for+Higher-Order+Functions&btnG=Search -- Edit this signature at http://www.digitas.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/ken/sig If monads encapsulate effects and lists form a monad, do lists correspond to some effect? Indeed they do, and the effect they correspond to is choice. Wadler 1995, Monads for fn'l programming -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
