Agreed. The original note confuses programs (syntax) with functions
(semantics). -- Conal
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Dan Doel dan.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Grigory Sarnitskiy sargrig...@ya.ru
wrote:
First, what are 'functions' we are interested at? It can't
Tillmann Rendel ren...@informatik.uni-marburg.de wrote:
I am curious what are interesting use-cases for that? Symbolic
analysis? self-compilers?
Optimization. For example, imagine the following definition of
function composition:
map f . map g = map (f . g)
f . g = \x - f (g x)
10.04.2012, 02:00, Ryan Ingram ryani.s...@gmail.com:
A concurring opinion here, and an example.
iff :: Bol - a - a - a
iff True x _ = x
iff False _ x = x
f, g :: Bool - Bool
f x = x
g x = iff x True False
Are these two functions equal? I would say yes, they are. Yet once you can
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 7:14 AM, Grigory Sarnitskiy sargrig...@ya.ru wrote:
Hello! I've just realized that Haskell is no good for working with
functions!
First, what are 'functions' we are interested at? It can't be the usual
set-theoretic definition, since it is not constructive. The
A concurring opinion here, and an example.
iff :: Bol - a - a - a
iff True x _ = x
iff False _ x = x
f, g :: Bool - Bool
f x = x
g x = iff x True False
Are these two functions equal? I would say yes, they are. Yet once you
can pattern match on functions, you can easily tell these functions
On 05/04/2012, Grigory Sarnitskiy sargrig...@ya.ru wrote:
One could expect from a language that bears 'functional' as its
characteristic to be able to do everything imaginable with functions.
However, the only thing Haskell can do with functions is to apply them to
arguments and to feed them
Hello! I've just realized that Haskell is no good for working with functions!
First, what are 'functions' we are interested at? It can't be the usual
set-theoretic definition, since it is not constructive. The constructive
definition should imply functions that can be constructed, computed.
Le 5 avril 2012 16:14, Grigory Sarnitskiy sargrig...@ya.ru a écrit :
Hello! I've just realized that Haskell is no good for working with functions!
First, what are 'functions' we are interested at? It can't be the usual
set-theoretic definition, since it is not constructive. The constructive
On 5 Apr 2012, at 15:14, Grigory Sarnitskiy wrote:
Hello! I've just realized that Haskell is no good for working with functions!
Obviously, that's not all of the imaginable possibilities. One also can
rewrite programs. And write programs that rewrite programs. And write
programs
Addendum:
Intel's Forte was the framework,
reFLect was the language : http://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/tom.melham/res/reflect.html
Quoting that page:
reFLect is a functional programming language designed and implemented by a
team at Intel Corporation's Strategic CAD Labs under the direction of Jim
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Grigory Sarnitskiy sargrig...@ya.ru wrote:
First, what are 'functions' we are interested at? It can't be the usual
set-theoretic definition, since it is not constructive. The constructive
definition should imply functions that can be constructed, computed.
Grigory So now I wonder, what are the languages that are functional in
Grigory the sense above? With a reasonable syntax and semantics, thus
Grigory no assembler. I guess Lisp might be of this kind, but I'm not
Grigory sure. In addition, I'm not a fan of parentheses. What else?
Grigory Pure?
Paul R wrote:
I am curious what are interesting use-cases for that? Symbolic
analysis? self-compilers?
Optimization. For example, imagine the following definition of function
composition:
map f . map g = map (f . g)
f . g = \x - f (g x)
In Haskell, we cannot write this, because we
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Tillmann Rendel
ren...@informatik.uni-marburg.de wrote:
Paul R wrote:
I am curious what are interesting use-cases for that? Symbolic
analysis? self-compilers?
Optimization. For example, imagine the following definition of function
composition:
map f .
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Tillmann Rendel
ren...@informatik.uni-marburg.de wrote:
Paul R wrote:
I am curious what are interesting use-cases for that? Symbolic
analysis? self-compilers?
Optimization. For example, imagine the following definition of function
composition:
map f . map
15 matches
Mail list logo
