[m-dev.] Thinking about mode analysis and uniqueness

Fergus Henderson fjh at cs.mu.OZ.AU
Wed Jan 8 00:11:29 AEDT 2003

On 07-Jan-2003, Ralph Becket <rafe at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> Fergus Henderson, Tuesday,  7 January 2003:
> > Ralph Becket, you wrote:
> > > Nancy Mazur, Monday,  6 January 2003:
> > > > I don't know how finegrained you are planning to go (and I'm not sure
> > > > anymore what the goal of this mode-analysis was in the first place),
> > > 
> > > The point is to identify safe cells for reuse in the context of nested
> > > unique values.
> > 
> > I thought the problem that you were trying to solve was lack of support
> > for nested unique modes in the mode system?
> That's right - and the point of nested unique modes is to support safe
> destructive update, surely.

Yes.  But it's not the only way of supporting safe destructive update.

AFAIK: Nancy and Peter's work on the reuse branch is an analysis which
supports safe destructive update, but because it is an analysis which
occurs in the optimization phase, long after mode analysis and other
semantic checking have finished, it does not solve the lack of support
for nested unique modes in the mode system.

Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne         |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
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

More information about the developers mailing list