[m-dev.] Fw: Re: Impurity annotations on clauses

[Mark Brown]

On 22-Jan-2007, Julien Fischer <juliensf at csse.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007, Mark Brown wrote:
> >Third, situation 7 could be mitigated by adding a higher-order `any' inst
> >to the mode system.  There is nothing intrinsically impure about lambda
> >expressions which constrain non-local solver variables, so long as they
> >are not called inside a negated context.  The higher-order `any' inst
> >would prevent this from happening without a promise of safety, and 
> >therefore
> >the construction of the lambda expression need not be considered impure.
> 
> I like this idea, however I'm not sure that with the current mode
> analyser that implementing it is going to be feasible (at least not
> without a lot of work).  The same goes for number 6 as well.

Hence "longer term".  The same also goes for the earlier discussion about
the components of insts.  Ralph wasn't joking about that PhD.

Cheers,
Mark.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at csse.unimelb.edu.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------