lgreg.meredith:
Haskellians,
Am i wrong in my assessment that the vast majority of reflective machinery
is missing from Haskell? Specifically,
* there is no runtime representation of type available for programmatic
representation
* there is no runtime
Hi
there is no runtime representation of type available for programmatic
representation
Data.Typeable.typeOf :: Typeable a = a - TypeRep
there is no runtime representation of the type-inferencing or checking
machinery
Pretty much, no. The GHC API may provide some.
there is no runtime
Neil,
Thanks very much for the detailed response. When we did Rosette, a
reflective actor-based language, back in the late '80's and early '90's, we
were very much influenced by Brian Cantwell Smith's account of reflection in
3-Lisp and similarly by Friedman and Wand's Mystery of the Tower
Greg Meredith wrote:
Haskellians,
Am i wrong in my assessment that the vast majority of reflective
machinery is missing from Haskell? Specifically,
* there is no runtime representation of type available for
programmatic representation
* there is no runtime representation of the
Jules,
Thanks for these comments. i wouldn't judge Haskell solely on the basis of
whether it embraced reflection as an organizing computational principle or
as a toolbox for programmers. Clearly, you can get very far without it. And,
it may be that higher-order functional gives you enough of the
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 07:33:54AM -0700, Greg Meredith wrote:
Our analysis suggested the following breakdown
- Structural reflection -- all data used in the evaluation of programs
has a programmatic representation
- Procedural reflection -- all execution machinery used in the
Op 11-sep-2007, om 18:43 heeft Greg Meredith het volgende geschreven:
Thanks for these comments. i wouldn't judge Haskell solely on the
basis of whether it embraced reflection as an organizing
computational principle or as a toolbox for programmers. Clearly,
you can get very far without
