14 Mar
2009
14 Mar
'09
10:03 a.m.
Adrian,
That's why I said "for appropriate g and f". But I see that my wording was misleading.
Thanks for following up! I had thought you were arguing that foldl and foldr were easily and intuitively interchangeable; they're surely not so for beginners. Now I think you're arguing that given strict oplus, each can be generally expressed in terms of the other, allowing for different space/time complexity. Thanks for clarifying. I should have paid more attention to your "appropriate g and f" qualifier. Cheers, John