On 16 Feb 2011, at 01:53, Scott Turner wrote:
In practice, Haskell a call-by-need language. Still, software
developers are not on firm ground when they run into trouble with
evaluation order, because the language definition leaves this open. Is
this an underspecification that should be fixed?
On 2011-02-15 21:12, John Meacham wrote:
> Except for the fact that compilers don't actually implement call by
> need. An example would be the speculative evaluation of ghc.
An interesting option. The things I've read say that it's not in the
released ghc.
> And local optimizations that affect as
Except for the fact that compilers don't actually implement call by
need. An example would be the speculative evaluation of ghc.
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/simonpj/papers/optimistic/adaptive_speculation.ps
And local optimizations that affect asymptotic behavior are used all
the
In practice, Haskell a call-by-need language. Still, software
developers are not on firm ground when they run into trouble with
evaluation order, because the language definition leaves this open. Is
this an underspecification that should be fixed?
1. Haskell programmers learn the pitfalls of sh
