Jules Bean wrote:
Cristian Baboi wrote:
But I guess it won't work because the compiler will optimize it and the call will disappear.
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here.
(That's the "world view on Haskell" issue I mean. I know this feeling with physics: "what the heck are they talking about, this is just mathematically wrong, ill-defined or otherwise void of contents?") Cristian Baboi wrote:
How can be Clean similar to Haskell and at the same time satisfy 9-12 ?
In Clean, print has the type print :: (Int -> Int) -> Dynamic but there is (hopefully) no equality on Dynamic . But it can be stored in a file or something store :: Dynamic -> IO () and loaded back. Thanks to IO, we can think of the file contents to be a non-deterministically chosen intentional representation for a value with extensional equality. I don't know whether Clean really does store that way, it may do more and hence break the extensional semantics "a bit". Regards, apfelmus