Browse thread
[Caml-list] more on lazy lists
- Michael Vanier
[
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: | Michael Vanier <mvanier@c...> |
| Subject: | [Caml-list] more on lazy lists |
OK, I've been playing around with the lazy evaluation feature of ocaml.
Now I understand why references are used internally for lazily evaluated
values; it's for memoization i.e. so that a particular value doesn't have
to be recomputed after it's been computed once. I'm having an odd problem,
though; consider this code:
(* Definition of lazy list type. *)
type 'a stream =
Nil
| Cons of 'a * 'a stream Lazy.t
exception Invalid_operation
let rec stream_for_each proc s =
match s with
Nil -> ()
| Cons (x, y) ->
(proc x;
stream_for_each proc (Lazy.force y))
(* Take the first 'n' elements from a stream. *)
let rec take n s =
match s with
Nil ->
(match n with
0 -> Nil
| n -> raise Invalid_operation)
| Cons (x, y) ->
(match n with
0 -> Nil
| n when n < 0 -> raise Invalid_operation
| _ ->
let next = Lazy.force y in
Cons (x, lazy (take (n - 1) next)))
let print_stream n s =
stream_for_each (fun x -> Printf.printf "%i\n" x) (take n s)
let rec stream_map2 proc s1 s2 =
match (s1, s2) with
(Cons (x1, y1), Cons (x2, y2)) ->
let s1' = Lazy.force y1 in
let s2' = Lazy.force y2 in
Cons ((proc x1 x2), lazy (stream_map2 proc s1' s2'))
| _ -> raise Invalid_operation
let add_streams s1 s2 =
stream_map2 (+) s1 s2
(* Make a constant stream. *)
let rec constant n =
Cons (n, lazy (constant n))
let ones = constant 1
So far, so good. Now consider this:
let integers =
let rec ints () =
Cons (1, lazy (add_streams ones (ints ())))
in
ints ()
print_stream 10 integers
This generates the error message:
"Stack overflow during evaluation (looping recursion?)."
I don't understand why this happens. Shouldn't the recursive call to
"ints ()" be deferred until it's required? I borrowed this example from
SICP, so it works in scheme, for what that's worth.
Mike
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners