[Haskell-cafe] Re: Wikipedia on first-class object

[Cristian Baboi]

Thank you.

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
http://www.eset.com