DDC compiler and effects; better than Haskell? (was Re:
sebastian.sylvan at gmail.com
Sat Aug 15 19:07:46 EDT 2009
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:45 PM, John A. De Goes <john at n-brain.net> wrote:
> Effect system optimizations are about taking programs that are correct, and
> transforming them to faster but equivalent programs that are still correct.
And since reordering access to externally modifiable data (external includes
memory if it's visible to other therads) is *not* safe, that shouldn't be
done. You're arguing for doing unsafe (i.e. they can cause a functioning
program to become non-functioning) transformations!
That said, your reasoning precludes the use of file read buffering, and
> other similar operations that are routinely done. It's only an illusion that
> such programs are "safe", with or without transformation of sequential read
Yes, you do have to be very careful about abstractions like that, but the
fact that we have some of that now, which can cause very hard-to-catch bugs
when you rely on ordering, is no good argument that we should add even more
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe