Comments on: Lazier function definitions by merging partial values
http://conal.net/blog/posts/lazier-function-definitions-by-merging-partial-values
Inspirations & experiments, mainly about denotative/functional programming in HaskellSat, 26 Sep 2020 21:06:12 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.17By: Conal Elliott » Blog Archive » Lazier functional programming, part 1
http://conal.net/blog/posts/lazier-function-definitions-by-merging-partial-values#comment-322
Mon, 13 Sep 2010 22:18:59 +0000http://conal.net/blog/?p=76#comment-322[…] reading. (The reading is less straightforward when patterns overlap, as mentioned in Lazier function definitions by merging partial values.) In a non-strict language like Haskell, there are three distinct boolean values, not two. Besides […]
]]>By: Conal Elliott » Blog Archive » Nonstrict memoization
http://conal.net/blog/posts/lazier-function-definitions-by-merging-partial-values#comment-321
Wed, 14 Jul 2010 05:28:37 +0000http://conal.net/blog/?p=76#comment-321[…] Lazier function definitions by merging partial values, I examined the standard Haskell style (inherited from predecessors) of definition by clauses, […]
]]>By: Conal Elliott » Blog Archive » Exact numeric integration
http://conal.net/blog/posts/lazier-function-definitions-by-merging-partial-values#comment-320
Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:24:52 +0000http://conal.net/blog/?p=76#comment-320[…] Now we have some information. How can we mix it in with the sum of recursive calls to integral? We can use (⊔) (least upper bound or “lub”), which is perfect for the job because its meaning is exactly to combine two pieces of information. See Merging partial values and Lazier function definitions by merging partial values. […]
]]>By: Robert F
http://conal.net/blog/posts/lazier-function-definitions-by-merging-partial-values#comment-319
Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:30:22 +0000http://conal.net/blog/?p=76#comment-319Is this related to the indefinability of parallel or in PCF (and corresponding lack of full abstraction for the domain theoretic semantics thereof)?
]]>By: Eyal Lotem
http://conal.net/blog/posts/lazier-function-definitions-by-merging-partial-values#comment-318
Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:24:26 +0000http://conal.net/blog/?p=76#comment-318Perhaps this calls for a language extension of non-biased pattern-matches?

As a language extension, it will probably be easier to prove totality while retaining nearly identical syntax to existing pattern-matching functions.

]]>By: Luke Palmer
http://conal.net/blog/posts/lazier-function-definitions-by-merging-partial-values#comment-317
Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:34:38 +0000http://conal.net/blog/?p=76#comment-317Well, I don’t know about uses, but with the existence of lub, I smell a theorem to the order of “Every set of equations has a least strict implementation”, for a suitably restricted definition of equation. If true, I would consider this a very important theorem. If I have some idle brainpower (unlikely) I’ll play with it a bit.
]]>