[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 1994-10-18 (12:54) |
From: | John Harrison <John.Harrison@c...> |
Subject: | Re: Polymorphic comparison |
Judicael Courant writes: | I think this polymorphic comparison is quite easy to implement in the | following way: | | #open "hashtbl";; | let c x y = (hash x) <= (hash y);; | #infix "c";; I should have pointed out that I want a true ordering, i.e. something antisymmetric. (Presumably the above isn't, since several different items might yield the same hash value). The idea is to be able to sort a list of elements of any type into an arbitrary but fixed order. Pierre Weis adds: | In the next 0.7 version of Caml Light, we plan to extend comparisons to a | polymorphic function (i.e. prefix < : 'a -> 'a -> bool, instead of the | now available prefix < : int -> int -> bool). That would be all I want, I think. | To extend comparisons to unrelated pairs of values, that is defining | prefix < with type scheme 'a -> 'b -> bool seems a bit strange to me. | What do you plan to do with such a general type scheme for comparisons ? I don't foresee any use for such a general mechanism, although that's how it was in Classic ML. The applications I have in mind are in theorem proving; for example canonicalizing expression trees based on an associative-commutative operation. However I can envisage some other uses, e.g. set/multiset comparison. I suspect that if you can only do pairwise comparison this is O(n^2), whereas just sorting both sets first then comparing should be O(n log n). John.