Ah -
The "state of the world" serialized into your representation.....
That would be interesting to see....
Neil
... ah you meant something different?
On 21/06/07, apfelmus
Tom Schrijvers wrote:
I understand that, depending on what the compiler does the result of :
do let f = (*) 2 print $ serialise f
might differ as, for example, the compiler might have rewritten f as \n -> n+n.
But, why would that make equational reasoning on serialise not valid?
Isn't that true for all functions in the IO monad that, even when invoked with the same arguments, they can produce different results?
Not if you take the ``state of the world" to be part of the arguments. If two programs behave differently for the same arguments and the same state of the world, then they're not equivalent. You do want your compiler to preserve equivalence, don't you?
You can put the internal representation of the argument into the "state of the world".
Regards, apfelmus
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe