From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9476BB81 for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:42:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iBDDg7M1015251 for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:42:07 +0100 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA31857 for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:42:06 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.181]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iBDDg4vo018483 for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:42:05 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp209-112.lns2.syd3.internode.on.net [203.122.209.112]) by smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id iBDDfm0r077462; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:11:49 +1030 (CST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] environment idiom From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: Thomas Fischbacher Cc: Markus Mottl , Andrej Bauer , caml-list In-Reply-To: References: <9410EC84C0872141B27A2726613EF45D02A52E08@psmrdcex01.psm.pin.safeco.com> <41B97FD7.50309@andrej.com> <1102732237.2611.580.camel@pelican.wigram> <41BB04D8.60405@andrej.com> <20041211181313.GA9656@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> <1102809398.2611.637.camel@pelican.wigram> <1102901206.2768.127.camel@pelican.wigram> <1102935187.2578.85.camel@pelican.wigram> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1102945308.2578.253.camel@pelican.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 14 Dec 2004 00:41:48 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 41BD9C2F.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41BD9C2C.004 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 sourceforge:01 wrote:01 glebe:01 061:98 idiom:01 nsw:01 snail:02 2037:02 purely:02 purely:02 functional:02 functional:02 programming:03 depends:04 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 23:01, Thomas Fischbacher wrote: > > The point really is: what do you mean by purely functional? > > I think the answer depends on context. > > I think the answer depends on properly wording the question! Of course :) I hardly need to point out that in all likelihood if I could do that, I'd probably already know the answer :) > My point is that with statements like > > > Yes, that indeed is my intention. Basically, any non-transparent > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > non-function code can be made purely functional and transparent > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > with a simple transformation, yet it doesn't by this transformation > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > get any easier to reason about the code. > > you are trying to "hit real people with mental bricks". LOL! Over the Internet too :) -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net