[Haskell-cafe] Re: Wikipedia on first-class object
cristi at ot.onrc.ro
Fri Dec 28 04:37:27 EST 2007
It sounds like a limit. xn --> x for n --> :-)
How can I get that maximal value when I start from a non maximal one ?
[1 .. ] and x=1:x are maximal ?
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:21:36 +0200, Miguel Mitrofanov
<miguelimo38 at yandex.ru> wrote:
>> How can I test that partial order in Haskell ?
> You can't. It's kinda internal. More specifically, if you try to compute
> a value, which is not maximal in this order, you'll get an error or loop
> forever. But you still can use such values in your programs if you don't
> try to compute them. The point is, maximal values are the only
> interesting ones, and all others are just approximations.
> In fact, you only have to worry about non-maximal values when you use
> recursion. The fundamental property of Haskell is that it computes the
> least fixed point. For example, if f maps (_|_) to (_|_), then "let x =
> f x in x" will evaluate to (_|_) - and you loop forever, see above.
________ Information from NOD32 ________
This message was checked by NOD32 Antivirus System for Linux Mail Servers.
part000.txt - is OK
More information about the Haskell-Cafe