Web-Projects/blog-static
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity

Make minor edits to the content

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Danila Fedorin 2020-05-09 16:52:05 -07:00
parent 85bd0b6c9c
commit 906e15674e
1 changed files with 4 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

3
content/blog/12_compiler_let_in_lambda/index.md
View File

@ -91,11 +91,14 @@ addSingle6 x = 6 + x
-- ... and so on ... -- ... and so on ...
``` ```
But now, we end up creating several functions with almost identical bodies, with the exception of the free variables themselves. Wouldn't it be better to perform the well-known strategy of reducing code duplication by factoring out parameters, and leaving only instance of the repeated code? We would end up with: But now, we end up creating several functions with almost identical bodies, with the exception of the free variables themselves. Wouldn't it be better to perform the well-known strategy of reducing code duplication by factoring out parameters, and leaving only instance of the repeated code? We would end up with:
```Haskell {linenos=table} ```Haskell {linenos=table}
addToAll n xs = map (addSingle n) xs addToAll n xs = map (addSingle n) xs
addSingle n x = n + x addSingle n x = n + x
``` ```
Observe that we no longer have the "infinite" number of functions - the infinitude of possible behaviors is created via currying. Also note that `addSingle` Observe that we no longer have the "infinite" number of functions - the infinitude of possible behaviors is created via currying. Also note that `addSingle`
{{< sidenote "right" "global-note" "is now declared at the global scope," >}} {{< sidenote "right" "global-note" "is now declared at the global scope," >}}
Wait a moment, didn't we just talk about nested polymorphic definitions, and how they change our typechecking model? If we transform our program into a bunch of global definitions, we don't need to make adjustments to our typechecking. <br><br> Wait a moment, didn't we just talk about nested polymorphic definitions, and how they change our typechecking model? If we transform our program into a bunch of global definitions, we don't need to make adjustments to our typechecking. <br><br>