Re: and then... (a curiosity)
- From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 13:21:40 +0200
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:28:16 -0700 (PDT), Adam Beneschan wrote:
"and then" is not a function, however, and has none of these
properties.
It could be made a function if Ada had lazy arguments.
I am unsure if the arguments of "and" are eager. You are a language lawyer,
I am not. But I used to think that the eagerness of evaluation is rather
unspecified, so that the compiler is free "not to care," when it optimizes
the code, as Jeff Carter has pointed out.
So basically, provided the above is correct, the choice was motivated by
least strong precondition (=unspecified eagerness), rather than by choosing
between eager and lazy evaluation.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
.
- References:
- and then... (a curiosity)
- From: mockturtle
- Re: and then... (a curiosity)
- From: Adam Beneschan
- and then... (a curiosity)
- Prev by Date: Re: Very confused by Ada tasking, can not explain the execution outcome.
- Next by Date: Re: Very confused by Ada tasking, can not explain the execution outcome.
- Previous by thread: Re: and then... (a curiosity)
- Next by thread: Very confused by Ada tasking, can not explain the execution outcome.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|