Article View: comp.lang.functional
Article #93Re: ** LAZY LANGUAGES FASTER?? **
From: Frank Silbermann
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 21:59
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 21:59
19 lines
1397 bytes
1397 bytes
In article <3737@svin02.info.win.tue.nl> erik@win.tue.nl writes: >david@gdstech.grumman.com (David Nettles) writes: > > Lazy evaluation does indeed save time by not evaluating arguments > that are not needed. However, eager evaluation saves times by never > evaluating the same argument twice. > In eager languages, all arguments are evaluated ONCE, > regardless of whether they are actually needed. This assumes implementation via string reduction. With string reduction, lazy programs execute very slowly. (Did somebody mention the speed of continental drift?) :-) With graph reduction, lazy evaluation means evaluation _at most_ once. The challenge of laziness is to find a way to implement graph reduction without imposing a large constant-factor overhead. ------------------------------------------ Frank Silbermann fs@cs.tulane.edu Tulane University New Orleans, Louisiana USA
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Jul27.215924.14812@cs.tulane.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gumby!wupost!tulane!fsReferences:
<1992Jul24.134857.23289@gdstech.grumman.com> <3737@svin02.info.win.tue.nl>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.lang.functional Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gumby!wupost!tulane!fs From: fs@cs.tulane.edu (Frank Silbermann) Subject: Re: ** LAZY LANGUAGES FASTER?? ** Message-ID: <1992Jul27.215924.14812@cs.tulane.edu> Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-14766]: caesar Sender: news@cs.tulane.edu Organization: Computer Science Dept., Tulane Univ., New Orleans, LA References: <1992Jul24.134857.23289@gdstech.grumman.com> <3737@svin02.info.win.tue.nl> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 21:59:24 GMT Lines: 19