[Haskell-cafe] What's up with this Haskell runtime error message:
Robert Dockins
robdockins at fastmail.fm
Wed Apr 5 19:46:59 EDT 2006
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 04:51 pm, Michael Goodrich wrote:
> Oops, I just realized that you gave me the answer, namely that it won't
> find fixed points of numeric sets of equations.
>
> Pity, that would really have made Haskell useful for this kind of
> scientific computing.
See section 4 of:
http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~rjmh/Papers/whyfp.html
See also:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Libraries_and_tools/Mathematics
http://users.info.unicaen.fr/~karczma/arpap/
> On 4/5/06, Brandon Moore <brandonm at yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> > Michael Goodrich wrote:
> > > Looks like my calulation involves a self referential set of
> > > definitions.
> > >
> > > Is Haskell not able to deal with a self referential set of definitions?
> > >
> > > I was frankly hoing it would since otherwise there is then the
> > > specter of sequence, i.e. that I have to finesse the order in which
> > > things are calculated so as to avoid it.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> >
> > Lazy evaluation is great with self-referential definitions, but id
> > doesn't do so well with ill-founded definitions. It also won't find
> > fixpoints of numeric equations. Here are some examples, and then some
> > explanation.
> >
> > Things that work:
> >
> > {- for interactive use in ghci -}
> > let ones = 1:ones
> > --infinite list of ones
> > let counting = 1:map (+1) counting
> > -- infinite list counting up from one
> > let fibs = 1:1:zipWith (+) fibs (tail fibs)
> > --fibbonacci numbers
> >
> > {- A larger program.
> > turns references by name into direct references
> > Try on a cyclic graph, like
> > buildGraph [("a",["b"]),("b",["a"])]
> > -}
> > import Data.List
> > import Data.Map as Map
> >
> > data Node = Node String [Node]
> > type NodeDesc = (String, [String])
> >
> > buildNode :: Map String Node -> NodeDesc -> Node
> > buildNode env (name,outlinks) =
> > Node name (concat [Map.lookup other finalBinds | other <- outlinks])
> >
> > buildGraph :: [(String,[String])] -> [Node]
> > buildGraph descs = nodes
> > where (finalBinds, nodes) = mapAccumR buildExtend Map.empty descs
> > buildExtend binds desc@(name,_) =
> > let node = buildNode finalBinds desc
> > in (Map.insert name node binds, node)
> >
> >
> > Things that will not work:
> >
> > let x = x
> > -- no information on how to define x
> >
> > let x = 2*x + 1
> > -- this is not treated algebraically
> >
> > let broke = 1:zipWith (+) broke (tail broke)
> > -- the second element depends on itself
> >
> >
> > Recursive definitions in Haskell can be explained by
> > saying that they find the least-defined fixedpoint of the equations.
> > Every type in Haskell has all the usual values you would have in a
> > strict language, plus an undefined value which corresponds to a
> > nonterminating computation. Also, there are values where subterms
> > of different types are undefined values of that type rather.
> >
> > For example, with pairs of numbers there are these posibilites
> > (x,y)
> > / \
> > (_|_,x) (x,|_|)
> > \ /
> > (_|_,_|_)
> >
> > _|_
> > where x and y represent any defined number, and _|_ is "undefined",
> > or a non-terminating computation. A value on any line is
> > considered more defined than values on lower lines. Any value which can
> > be obtained from another by replacing subterms with _|_ is less defined,
> > if neither can be made from the other that way than neither is more
> > defined that the other.
> >
> >
> > Think of a definition like x = f x. That will make x the least-defined
> > value which is a fixedpoint of f. For example, numeric operations are
> > (generally) strict, so _|_ * x = _|_, _|_ + x = _|_, and
> > _|_ is a fixedpoint of \x -> 2*x + 1.
> >
> > for broke, consider the function f = \l -> 1:(zipWith (+) l (tail l))
> > f (x:_|_) = 1:zipWith (+) (1:_|_) (tail (1:_|_))
> > = 1:zipWith (+) (1:_|_) _|_
> > = 1:_|_
> > so 1:_|_ is a fixedpoint. It's also the least fixedpoint, because
> > _|_:_|_ is not a fixedpoint, and
> > f _|_ = 1:<something>, so _|_ is not a fixedpoint either. If I try that
> > definition of broke, ghci prints "[1" and hangs, indicating that the
> > rest of the list is undefined.
> >
> > If multiple definitions are involved, think of a function on a tuple of
> > all the definitions:
> >
> > x = y
> > y = 1:x
> >
> > corresponds to the least fixedpoint of (\(x,y) -> (y,1:x))
> >
> > The recursiveness in the graph example is more tedious to analyze like
> > this, but it works out the same way - whatever value of "finalBinds" is
> > fed into the recursive equation, you get out a map built by taking the
> > empty map and adding a binding for each node name. Chase it around a few
> > more times, and you'll get some detail about the nodes.
> >
> > Also, posting code really helps if you want specific advice. Thanks to
> > the hard work of compiler writers, the error message are usually precise
> > enough for a message like this to describe the possibilites. If you
> > enjoy my rambling I suppose you should keep posting error messages :)
> >
> > Brandon
> >
> > > cheers,
> > >
> > > -Mike
> > >
> > >
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >-
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> > > Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> > > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
More information about the Haskell-Cafe
mailing list