From: Oliver Bandel <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] From a recursive circuit to a functional/recursive OCaml-code...]
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 05:03:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060205040328.GA5917@first.in-berlin.de> (raw)
Hello,
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 12:36:53PM +1300, Jonathan Roewen wrote:
> Where does the iterating come in? From your description, all you're
> doing is a one-time calculation on a set of input values.
u is calculated out of e and x with operator/function function_B.
But e is calculated out of u with function_C
So, there is a loop of calculation, which means that there is recursion...
>
> E.g. of the form:
>
> while true do
> print_result (func_A (read_int ()))
> done;;
Yes, that's, what is the underlying thing: you get input values and
create output values.
But the calculation of output values is done via an internal feedback...
>
> Perhaps if you upload the circuit somewhere so people can see, it
> might make a difference.
OK, because sending it as an email-attachement didn't worked on this list,
I put the picture here:
http://www.belug.org/~ob/struktur-grafisch.jpg
The first picture is the so called trivial machine,
which only operates on the input with an operation/function
and creates an output value;
and the second picture in the file is the non-trivial machine
(the simplest version of a non-trivial machine with one input value
and the necessary feedback inside the machine).
(Distinction between both is done because: the non-trivial machine is
history dependnt, the trivial is not. Also there are differences in
prediction of both: the trivial machine is time-independent and therefore
easily to predict. But the non-trivial machine can't be tested/analyzed/predicted
as like the trivial machine...)
For the trivial machine I had done two implementations: one is iterative
and uses the while-loop. And then I did a recursive implementation.
For the trivial machine (first picture) I created the following code
that is functional/recursive:
(* -------------------------------------------- *)
let function_A x = x * 2
let _ =
let rec calc () =
let inval = int_of_string (read_line()) (* input-value "x" in the picture *)
in
let outval = function_A inval (* Operator/Function "A" in the picture *)
in
Printf.printf "%d => %d \n" inval outval; calc() (* outval is "y" in the picture *)
in
calc ()
(* -------------------------------------------- *)
For the non-trivial machine because of the feedbacks it's
not so easy to write it as a program.
IMHO FP has some advantages, because I do not need to store
transitional valuthe necessaryes... but the recursions stuff.... welll, how to implement it here?!
I had tried some ways (mutual recursive functions, mutual values
and combinations, but I don't know what I really need and
I need some help here....).
TIA,
Oliver
reply other threads:[~2006-02-05 4:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060205040328.GA5917@first.in-berlin.de \
--to=oliver@first.in-berlin.de \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox