[m-dev.] Freeze the compiler

[Peter Schachte]

On Mon, Nov 13, 2000 at 07:46:11AM -0800, Ralph Becket wrote:
> Okay, I'll buy that.  I think we should have X ^ f(A) ----> f(X, A)

That's fine.  The only reason I preferred the other was because it makes it
easier to explain ( "'^' is just like call/2 with the arguments in the other
order").  But if there's a reason to prefer inserting the accessed term
argument at the front of the argument list rather than appending it to the
end, I see nothing wrong with that.  Since we probably want to require that
the principal functor of the second (closure) argument is known at
compile-time (it has to be for ':=' anyway), this doesn't require a fancy
new version of call or anything.

-- 
Peter Schachte <schachte at cs.mu.OZ.AU>  The significant problems we face
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~schachte/      cannot be solved by the same level of
Phone:  +61 3 8344 9166                thinking that created them.
Fax:    +61 3 9348 1184                    -- attributed to Albert Einstein 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------