Browse thread
[Caml-list] Why is (@) written in O'Caml?
-
Oleg
-
Pal-Kristian Engstad
-
Oleg
- Pal-Kristian Engstad
-
Oleg
-
Pal-Kristian Engstad
[
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: | Pal-Kristian Engstad <engstad@n...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Why is (@) written in O'Caml? |
On Thursday 05 December 2002 01:24 pm, Oleg wrote:
> On Thursday 05 December 2002 04:16 pm, Pal-Kristian Engstad wrote:
> > But, that is _exactly_ what the function above does!
>
> It's not about *what* it does, but *how* (@) does it. (@) is recursive and
> not tail-recursive.
Okey - I see where you're coming from. Since we know that we're creating a new
copy of a list, we know there will be references to it elsewhere, hence we
may see it as a mutable list and do something like:
struct cell { value *hd; cell* tl; };
newlist = nil;
prev = nil;
list = l1;
/* copy l1 */
while (list != nil) {
pnew = alloc(list); /* Allocate new cell. */
if (!newlist) newlist = pnew; /* Mark first cell. */
pnew->hd = list->hd; /* Copy data at cell. */
pnew->tl = nil; /* Init to nil. */
if (prev) prev->tl = pnew; /* Link previous cell to this. */
prev = pnew; /* Update previous. */
list = list->tl; /* Get next l1 cell. */
}
if (prev) {
prev->tl = l2;
return newlist;
}
else {
return l2;
}
Is that what you mean?
PKE.
-------------------
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