Hi Bulat,
Bulat Ziganshin-2 wrote:
Hello staafmeister,
Thursday, September 10, 2009, 3:54:34 PM, you wrote:
What do you think about such a function? This function is
a bit of refactoring
-- global variable in haskell way
cache = unsafePerformIO $ newIORef M.empty
memo f x =
Hello staafmeister,
Thursday, September 10, 2009, 4:23:26 PM, you wrote:
This doesn't work and is exactly what I'm afraid the compiler is going to
do. Cache needs to
be associated with the function f.
Otherwise one would get conflicts
well, technique i used is well known, we would have
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 05:23:26AM -0700, staafmeister wrote:
To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
From: staafmeister g.c.stave...@uu.nl
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:23:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Re[Haskell-cafe] [2]: memoization
Hi Bulat,
Bulat Ziganshin-2 wrote:
Hello staafmeister
: Re: Re[Haskell-cafe] [2]: memoization
Hi Bulat,
Bulat Ziganshin-2 wrote:
Hello staafmeister,
Thursday, September 10, 2009, 3:54:34 PM, you wrote:
What do you think about such a function? This function is
a bit of refactoring
-- global variable in haskell
, staafmeister wrote:
To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
From: staafmeister g.c.stave...@uu.nl
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:23:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Re[Haskell-cafe] [2]: memoization
Hi Bulat,
Bulat Ziganshin-2 wrote:
Hello staafmeister,
Thursday, September 10, 2009, 3:54:34 PM