1 Mar
2016
1 Mar
'16
15:16
I commented out the definition because I made mine earlier before I saw your commit.
It is true. I don't need the recursive type per se. Nevertheless, I thought it would be more efficient. When we add a variable, all offsets need to be incremented by one. If we use only one map the complexity would be O(n) but when we use two maps (with n = n_i + n_o) then the complexity is only O(n_i).
If the global scope (n_o) is a lot larger than all the inner scope used in let/function call we could observer better performances.
--
Pierre Delaunay
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Stefan Monnier monnier@iro.umontreal.ca
wrote:
> > +(* Offset is the number to take us out of the inner scope
> > + * Scope is the Mapping between Variable's names and its current index
> loc
> > + * Offset + Scope *)
> > +type context_impl = int * scope
>
> You commented out my "identical" definition in lexp.ml:
>
> type senv_type = (db_revindex SMap.t * db_index)
>
> so I obviously agree it's a good way to do it.
>
> > +(* The recursive type that does everything
> > + * inner Scope * Outer Scope *)
> > +type lexp_context = context_impl * lexp_context option
>
> Hmm... but here I don't understand why you need this. When would you
> need lexp_context and wouldn't you be able to use just contet_impl (aka
> senv_type) instead?
>
>
> Stefan
> _______________________________________________
> Typer mailing list
> Typer@iro.umontreal.ca
> https://webmail.iro.umontreal.ca/mailman/listinfo/typer
>
--
Pierre Delaunay