Browse thread
RE: Undefined evaluation order: define it for constructors ?
- Dave Berry
[
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: | -- (:) |
| From: | Dave Berry <dave@k...> |
| Subject: | RE: Undefined evaluation order: define it for constructors ? |
Map is a function that really can be evaluated in parallel. There is a project at Heriot-Watt university that translates pure SML programs to run on a parallel processor. Array.map can potentially be run in parallel on SIMD machines too. So there is an argument for not specifying the order of traversal of these functions (although this need not affect the language definition). Dave. -----Original Message----- From: Hugo Herbelin [mailto:Hugo.Herbelin@inria.fr] Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 2:27 PM To: garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: Undefined evaluation order: define it for constructors ? [Excerpt] It is sometimes useful to do side-effects with "List.map" (or "Array.map"): it leads to code more readable than if using "fold_left". I'd be happy if the evaluation order of "map" in the interface were specified, as it is the case (for a good reason) for the "iter" functional.