Michael Hanus wrote:
> as already done in the Muenster Curry Compiler.
> However, I'll keep the definition of (==) as a primitive
> (like in the MCC) since its direct implementation is a bit
> more efficient than compare and it is often used in programs.
There is a more important reason for using two different
primitives for equality and ordering: For some types it is
possible to check equality, but they do not have a natural
ordering. For instance, MCC supports equality tests for
partial applications (which seems natural given that they
can be used in equality and disequality constraints), file
handles, and also mutable references in the IO monad. However,
compare will report an error at runtime when applied to
arguments of these kinds.
Regards
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
curry mailing list
curry_at_lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/curry
Received on Mo Mär 20 2006 - 17:26:45 CET