User loginNavigation 
Optimisation by repeated beta and etareductionThe following post recently showed up on Planet Haskell: Morte: an intermediate language for superoptimising functional programs. From the post: I am worried about this because the author explicitly wishes to support both folds and unfolds, and, according to Catamorphisms and anamorphisms = general or primitive recursion, folds and unfolds together have the expressive power of general recursion—so that not every term has a normal form (right?). More generally, it seems to me that being able to offer the strong guarantee that the author offers implies in particular a solution to the halting problem, hence a nonTuringcomplete language. Later, the author says: You can take any recursive data type and mechanically transform the type into a fold and transform functions on the type into functions on folds.I have a similar concern here; it seems to me to be saying that folds can express general recursion, but I thought (though I don't have a reference) that they could express only primitive recursion. Have I got something badly conceptually wrong? By L Spice at 20140912 16:04  LtU Forum  previous forum topic  next forum topic  other blogs  4594 reads

Browse archivesActive forum topics 
Recent comments
18 hours 56 min ago
19 hours 12 min ago
20 hours 4 min ago
20 hours 51 min ago
21 hours 19 min ago
21 hours 41 min ago
21 hours 59 min ago
22 hours 41 min ago
23 hours 3 min ago
23 hours 19 min ago