[Haskell-cafe] Hints for Euler Problem 11

[Kim-Ee Yeoh]

Lennart Augustsson wrote:
> 
> On 8/17/07, Kim-Ee Yeoh <a.biurvOir4 at asuhan.com> wrote:
>> How much static evaluation do you want to see
>> in Haskell?
> 
> I'd like to see as much static evaluation as is practically possible.
> 

Yes but not in (the language formally defined as) Haskell. Not 
even in {your favorite Haskell compiler/interpreter} without -O. 
With -O by all means let her rip.

Incidentally, GHC's type checker is Turing complete. You 
already have as much static evaluation as is practically possible. 
You already knew that.


Lennart Augustsson wrote:
> 
> And as a previous poster showed, ghc does concatenate strings.
> 

And Haskell (as in the current language definition) does not.
I was talking about Haskell.

Having said that, I'll concede there may be room for more than 
one language here. I want syntax transparently reflecting
straightforward if slowpoke operational semantics. You want 
fast, tight programs. I want fast, tight programs too, but 
not by giving up the former.

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Hints-for-Euler-Problem-11-tf4114963.html#a12197224
Sent from the Haskell - Haskell-Cafe mailing list archive at Nabble.com.