Re: [Caml-list] Parameter evaluation order

[Igor Pechtchanski <pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1498 bytes --]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Damien Doligez wrote:

> On Aug 23, 2005, at 09:12, skaller wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 18:50 +0200, Damien Doligez wrote:
> >
> > > Suppose you want to evaluate a curried function call in left-to-right
> > > order:
> > > f e1 e2 e3 e4
> > >
> > > You must evaluate f first, then e1.  Then you must apply f to e1,
> > > giving a new function g1.  Then you must evalue e2, then apply f1 to
> > > e2, giving f2, etc.
> > >
> > > That's because f might do some side effects between its arguments.
> >
> > what data, and possibly annotations, would be required to solve this
> > problem?
>
> The most direct solution is to introduce the notion of function arity in
> the type system.  As far as I know, there is no theoretical difficulty,
> the biggest problem is to find a syntax that satisfies everyone...

Hi,

Been lurking on this thread, decided to chime in.

This may be a naïve question, but what's wrong with tuples?  It doesn't
seem like the order in which the tuple components are evaluated matters
(in terms of efficiency, that is).  Am I missing something?
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA