Talk:IO Semantics: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
(equalities; concurrency) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
It provides a concrete definition of IO that can be compared for equality to know if two IO programs are equivalent or not. --[[User:Roconnor|Roconnor]] 03:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC) | It provides a concrete definition of IO that can be compared for equality to know if two IO programs are equivalent or not. --[[User:Roconnor|Roconnor]] 03:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC) | ||
Maybe so. Thanks. For a semantics, I think I'd want a lot more equalities than the representation by itself provides, especially involving <hask>SysCallName</hask>. | |||
Also (raising a new question), I don't see this semantic model at all addressing concurrency, which is a huge semantic complicator for imperative computation. [[User:Conal|Conal]] 08:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 08:13, 3 December 2009
I don't understand in what sense this IO definition is a "semantics". Conal 04:49, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
It provides a concrete definition of IO that can be compared for equality to know if two IO programs are equivalent or not. --Roconnor 03:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Maybe so. Thanks. For a semantics, I think I'd want a lot more equalities than the representation by itself provides, especially involving SysCallName.
Also (raising a new question), I don't see this semantic model at all addressing concurrency, which is a huge semantic complicator for imperative computation. Conal 08:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)