HtDP in Coq? Hadn't thought of of that before...
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> A factor of 2.+.
>
> (We could provide a type system, take away recursion, and replace it with a
> structural induction form. It would be impossible to write infinite loops.)
>
>
> On
A factor of 2.+.
(We could provide a type system, take away recursion, and replace it with a
structural induction form. It would be impossible to write infinite loops.)
On Nov 10, 2010, at 12:41 PM, John Clements wrote:
>
> On Nov 10, 2010, at 6:50 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
>>
>> Y
On Nov 10, 2010, at 6:50 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> Your reasoning is correct. What's the performance hit?
In order to try it, I used the legendary 12.4.2, and... uh, it seg faulted.
Okay, I submitted a bug report on that. Moving right along:
Testing in the simplest way, here's what
The value in the large comes when the data structures are more complex
(in the function below you'd use a loop or filter, of course). When
they are larger, you can pinpoint where to change your function based
on a change to your data definition.
For example, consider writing an interpreter. Now im
I see the reasoning now, I apologize. It's a good choice for
students, not so sure about ye old daily buggy sofware maintenance.
OTOH, perhaps if this practice was widespread it would lead to less
bugs or at least more maintenable software. At least for those aware
of this "idiom".
On Wed, Nov
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:40 AM, namekuseijin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:13 AM, John Clements
> wrote:
>> ;; NOW I'M A STUDENT:
>>
>> ;; only-long-strings : (listof string) -> (listof string)
>> ;; return a list containing the strings longer than 2 chars
>> (define/noloop (only-long-str
On Nov 10, 2010, at 10:40 AM, namekuseijin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:13 AM, John Clements
> wrote:
>> ;; NOW I'M A STUDENT:
>>
>> ;; only-long-strings : (listof string) -> (listof string)
>> ;; return a list containing the strings longer than 2 chars
>> (define/noloop (only-long-strin
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:13 AM, John Clements
wrote:
> ;; NOW I'M A STUDENT:
>
> ;; only-long-strings : (listof string) -> (listof string)
> ;; return a list containing the strings longer than 2 chars
> (define/noloop (only-long-strings l)
> (cond [(empty? l) empty]
> [else (cond [(< 2 (
Your reasoning is correct. What's the performance hit?
On Nov 9, 2010, at 9:13 PM, John Clements wrote:
> Here's a simple macro that prevents same-argument recursive calls (including
> non-tail ones). It's illustrated by a student function that made a teeny
> mistake which would result in l
Here's a simple macro that prevents same-argument recursive calls (including
non-tail ones). It's illustrated by a student function that made a teeny
mistake which would result in looping forever, but (using this macro) instead
signals an error. To the best of my limited knowledge, beginner is
10 matches
Mail list logo
