[Haskell-cafe] type metaphysics
Daniel van den Eijkel
dvde at gmx.net
Mon Feb 2 13:34:18 EST 2009
oops, the '$ drop 1000' in the main function should not be there...
Daniel van den Eijkel schrieb:
> I had the same idea, here's my implemention, running on an old Winhugs
> 2001 (and GHC 6.8).
> regards, Daniel
> import System
> import Directory
> chars = map chr [32..126]
> string 0 = return ""
> string n = do
> c <- chars
> s <- string (n-1)
> return (c:s)
> mkfun n = do
> s <- string n
> return ("f :: Integer -> Bool; f = " ++ s)
> test fundef = do
> system ("del test.exe")
> writeFile "test.hs" (fundef ++ "; main = return ()")
> system ("ghc --make test.hs")
> b <- doesFileExist "test.exe"
> if b then putStrLn fundef else return ()
> main = do
> let fundefs = [0..] >>= mkfun
> mapM_ test $ drop 1000 fundefs
> Lennart Augustsson schrieb:
>> You can enumerate all possible implementations of functions of type
>> (Integer -> Bool).
>> Just enumerate all strings, and give this to a Haskell compiler
>> f :: Integer -> Bool
>> f = <enumerated-string-goes-here>
>> if the compiler is happy you have an implementation.
>> The enumerated functions do not include all mathematical functions of
>> type (Integer -> Bool), but it does include the ones we usually mean
>> by the type (Integer -> Bool) in Haskell.
>> -- Lennart
>> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Martijn van Steenbergen
>> <martijn at van.steenbergen.nl> wrote:
>>> Lennart Augustsson wrote:
>>>> The Haskell function space, A->B, is not uncountable.
>>>> There is only a countable number of Haskell functions you can write,
>>>> so how could there be more elements in the Haskell function space? :)
>>>> The explanation is that the Haskell function space is not the same as
>>>> the functions space in set theory. Most importantly Haskell functions
>>>> have to be monotonic (in the domain theoretic sense), so that limits
>>>> the number of possible functions.
>>> I was thinking about a fixed function type A -> B having uncountably many
>>> *values* (i.e. implementations). Not about the number of function types of
>>> the form A -> B. Is that what you meant?
>>> For example, fix the type to Integer -> Bool. I can't enumeratate all
>>> possible implementations of this function. Right?
>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe