"interact" behaves oddly if used interactively
hallgren at cse.ogi.edu
Thu Oct 2 17:06:56 EDT 2003
John Meacham wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 12:08:07PM +0100, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
>>This is because strict evaluation is always easy to understand.
>>Lazy/non-strict evaluation can be non-intuitive/confusing/surprising, even
>>for people who are used to it.
>what is easy or confusing and what becomes intuitive is learned and
>depends a lot on background..
>... IMHO lazy semantics can become just as intuitive and easy
>as strict or mathematical semantics.
I once got confused by strict evalution, even though I had never seen a
lazy functional language.
This happened when I was exposed to Standard ML as an undergraduate
student. Before then, I had been learning programming using imperative
languages like Pascal and Modula-2. One if the things I liked in SML was
the conciseness offered by if-then-else *expressions*, e.g.,
fun fac n = if n=0 then 1 else n*fac(n-1)
as compared to the more verbose if-then-else *statements* I had used in
other languages. But then I had they idea that I could do the same in
Module-2 simply by defining an if-then-else function!
PROCEDURE IfThenElse(b:BOOLEAN; t,e:INTEGER):INTEGER;
IF b THEN RETURN t ELSE RETURN e END
But I was surprised to notice that this implementation of the factorial
function looped. I soon realized what the problem was: the IfThenElse
function is too strict! I was very disappointed...
So, for over ten years now, I have done most of my programming in lazy
functional languages. I am sure I would run into occasional surprises if
I were to switch back to a strict language.
"Delay is preferable to error."
- Thomas Jefferson (3rd President of the United States)
More information about the Haskell-Cafe