I have to admit that I am quite sceptical about your idea but I also
understand your desire. The current factorization is that only guards are
"speculative" (in the sense that they might fail and also in that they might
waste time). You are attempting to make also bodys speculative. This would
definitely require a whole new setup for combinators. Moreover, you have to
be really sure that you cannot get what you want by search anyway.
Christian
-- Christian Schulte, http://www.ps.uni-sb.de/~schulte/----- Original Message ----- From: "Luis Quesada" <luque@info.ucl.ac.be> Newsgroups: mozart-oz.users To: <users@mozart-oz.org> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 10:51 PM Subject: Re: "or" statement
> Christian Schulte wrote: > > > both Luis and Denys are right (how Salomonian of me ;-) ). Oz used to employ > > the top-commit rule (allow the disjunction to reduce with an entailed > > clause, provided its body is skip). However the current system does not > > implement it (their use seemed to be limited at that time). > > > > I begin to see that there is new and revived interest in combinators. Also > > it appears to me that we are lacking documentation of their semantics. Also, > > there have been questions raised regarding their semantics. I can only > > reassure that programming combinators is reasonably easy and getting at your > > favourite disjunction is simple -- this is the true advantage of spaces. > > > > So don't feel confined to the combinators that are there, build your own. If > > you are then convinced make a proposal of inclusion into the system. > > > > With other words: design, hack, discuss and contribute! > > > > > > Totally agree with your encouragement! Let us try to put it into practice by > bringing an old issue between us back :-) . Even though I am very pleased with > the power of the current or (after accepting your invitation to use control > variables), I still keep the dream of counting on a combinator that behave > like the current or but also be able to do the following: > > thread if X=1 then Y=2 end end > new_or > X=1 Y=1 > [] > X=2 > end > > Given the scenario above, I would like that new_or reduce to X=2. In other > words, I would like to have an or able to see the threads of its parent. > > Certainly, the first step is to start assimilating the current implementation. > However, I wonder whether the implementation of such a new combinator requires > from a space the ability to export its threads. > > Luis > > -- > Catholic University of Louvain > Department of Computing Science and Engineering > Place Sainte Barbe, 2 > B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium > Phone: (++32) (10) 47 90 13 > Fax: (++32) (10) 45 03 45 > E-mail: luque@info.ucl.ac.be > > > > - > Please send submissions to users@mozart-oz.org > and administriva mail to users-request@mozart-oz.org. > The Mozart Oz web site is at http://www.mozart-oz.org/. >
- Please send submissions to users@mozart-oz.org and administriva mail to users-request@mozart-oz.org. The Mozart Oz web site is at http://www.mozart-oz.org/.