Difference between revisions of "Open research problems"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (tweaked formatting) |
m (Content reorganised; changes to formatting) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Research]] |
[[Category:Research]] |
||
+ | == General problems == |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | This is a problem that came up during IRC discussions. We consider a purely functional language L. By "purely functional" we mean a language that has value semantics; that is, there is no function such that after evaluation of the function the value that was referred to by something else changed. (Also known as "No Side Effects"). A value is "changed" when it is not the case during an evaluation that when the old value and the new value would both be fully evaluated, there wouldn't be the same result. This should make sure that laziness is allowed in the purely functional language. |
||
⚫ | |||
+ | :{| |
||
⚫ | This is a problem that came up during IRC discussions. We consider a purely functional language L. By "purely functional" we mean a language that has value semantics; that is, there is no function such that after evaluation of the function the value that was referred to by something else changed. (Also known as "No Side Effects"). A value is "changed" when it is not the case during an evaluation that when the old value and the new value would both be fully evaluated, there wouldn't be the same result. This should make sure that laziness is allowed in the purely functional language.<br> |
||
+ | <br> |
||
The general problem is whether these purely functional languages can implement all algorithms that can be implemented in a language like C as efficiently in an amortized sense ignoring space-usage. |
The general problem is whether these purely functional languages can implement all algorithms that can be implemented in a language like C as efficiently in an amortized sense ignoring space-usage. |
||
+ | |} |
||
− | == |
+ | == Specific problems == |
+ | |||
− | As for a specific problem: |
||
+ | === Implement encapsulated-state interface entirely in Haskell (no primitives) === |
||
⚫ | |||
+ | :{| |
||
⚫ | |||
+ | |} |
Revision as of 22:47, 21 October 2021
General problems
Efficiency of lazy functional languages
-
This is a problem that came up during IRC discussions. We consider a purely functional language L. By "purely functional" we mean a language that has value semantics; that is, there is no function such that after evaluation of the function the value that was referred to by something else changed. (Also known as "No Side Effects"). A value is "changed" when it is not the case during an evaluation that when the old value and the new value would both be fully evaluated, there wouldn't be the same result. This should make sure that laziness is allowed in the purely functional language.
The general problem is whether these purely functional languages can implement all algorithms that can be implemented in a language like C as efficiently in an amortized sense ignoring space-usage.
Specific problems
Implement encapsulated-state interface entirely in Haskell (no primitives)
-
Implement
Data.STRef
andControl.Monad.ST.runST
without using the built-in monadicST
orIO
types. This needs to happen with operations that all run in O(1) amortized time.