🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <11896@life.ai.mit.edu> misha@just-right.ai.mit.edu (Mike Bolotski) writes:
> In article <5020:Nov1518:23:0790@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
> >What I'd love to see is a way to turn on optimizer debugging output for
> >a section of code. The optimizer would print out everything that it
> >looks for while optimizing, what it finds, and what it's not sure about.
> >Then the programmer can make assertions to fill in the missing gaps.
> This is something that everyone in the group will hopefully agree on.

I'm sure someone will disagree just for the sake of arguing with me. :-(

> And by the way, Dan, are we ever going to see a public admission of
> error on the "optimal addition sequence" issue? 

You mean my statements about optimizing addition chains in a general
computation? In the ``array references cannot be made optimal'' thread I
gave something that might stand for a proof of my assertions. Jim admits
that I'm right too.

> Or do you claim
> to be more an authority on the issue than Aho, Sethi, or Ullman?

I claim that you're misapplying their statements about something
entirely different. In fact, I said so before in a followup to your
article.

---Dan