On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote: >> > In Shap's proposal it _was_ the definitions doing the picking. >> >> Actually, is that right, Shap? That's what I think you said, but it's >> the opposite of what you'd seem to want if you want to know whether an >> application allocates without looking things up. > > Yes. That's what I said. It's not necessary to look things up. The compiler > will issue an error in the presence of a non-explicit allocation arising > from application.
I changed my thinking about that later on. Partial applications don't themselves allocate, but they work by calling curried functions which explicitly allocate by saying "lambda". Whether that becomes a heap allocation depends on how the partially applied function is used, but we still blame any allocation on the "lambda", which was asking for it. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
