Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Recursive lists
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: james woodyatt <jhw@w...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] About Obj (was Recursive lists)
On 11 Oct 2004, at 09:46, brogoff wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2004, james woodyatt wrote:
>> On 11 Oct 2004, at 06:38, Christophe Raffalli wrote:
>>> Jean-Christophe Filliatre wrote [quite sensibly]:
>>>> [...]
>>>> This shouldn't be advised, and not even posted on this list.
>>> And how do you write a tail recursive map doing only one structure
>>> traversal (which is important with the penalty for memory access) on
>>> immutable list without the Obj module ?
>> By using a more appropriate data structure, e.g. a lazy list.  It's a
>> pay-me-now-or-pay-me-later sort of game you're playing here.
> Count me among those entirely unswayed by this.
> You could also respectfully request that the implementors provide a 
> safe
> way to get this well known optimization WITHOUT having to resort to Obj
> usage [...]

Okay.  It's a pay-now-pay-later-or-pay-INRIA sort of game.  <smile/>

Yes, it would be nice to have tail-recursion-modulo-cons.  It's not 
killing me to have to wait for it though-- a lazy list does the job 
nicely for me.  However, you can count me as one of the people who 
would like to see this and GCaml be the main features of OCaml 3.09.

j h woodyatt <>
markets are only free to the people who own them.

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: