variables in 'let rec'

From: David Chemouil (David.Chemouil@enseeiht.fr)
Date: Wed Mar 22 2000 - 10:41:15 MET

  • Next message: Dmitri Lomov: "C primitives returning functions again"

    hi

    I'm currently writing a program where I need to create both variables
    and functions in a 'let rec'. The problem is that it is not allowed to
    define a simple variable (i.e not a variant) in a 'let rec', because it
    would be able to write things such as:

    # let rec x = x+1;;
    This kind of expression is not allowed as right-hand side of `let rec'

    This error message seems okay to me.

    However, the error message also occurs in situations where there is no
    problem:

    # let rec x = fact 5 (* using usual fact *)
                  ^^^^^^
      and even = function
      | 0 -> true
      | n -> odd (n-1)
      and odd = function
      | 1 -> true
      | n -> even (n-1);;
    This kind of expression is not allowed as right-hand side of `let rec'

    What is "funny" is that it is possible to write 'Some (fact 5)'...

    I wonder, then, if it would be possible to be a little less strict in
    the typing policy. I believe however that it must be hard to perform
    this, because it believe it is undecidable in the general case. But
    isn't it possible to find a less strict policy which remains decidable?
    For example, what if, in the typer, the 'let rec ... and ...' definition
    was split in two parts:
    - the first part would be typed first: it would contain the variable
    definitions which would be typed as a normal 'let ... and ...'.
    - the second part would be typed as the current 'let rec ... and ...',
    but the environment would contain the variables typed in the first part.

    This system would enable to create variables in a 'let rec', but would
    still forbid :
    - to define mutually recursive variables
    - to define non-recursive functions within a 'let rec'.

    Of course, I guess the problem must be harder than that, but I think the
    current system isn't completely "natural", as it forbids something that
    is mathematically correct...

    Anyway, if this problem is really to complex, or undecidable, or not
    worth the effot, why not allow any variable definition in a 'let rec'
    and print a warning message? Then, the programmer would decide if the
    definition may lead to an error...

    regards

    dc 

    -- 
David Chemouil [mailto:chemouil@enseeiht.fr] [mobile: 06 84 16 26 65]

    Laboratoire d'informatique et de mathématiques appliquées (IRIT-INPT)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 22 2000 - 19:20:19 MET