search

gmalecha / mirror-core

A framework for extensible, reflective decision procedures.
Other
19 stars 5 forks source link

Determine a cvb whitelist for exprD' #49

Open gmalecha opened 10 years ago

gmalecha commented 10 years ago

Requested by Joey Dodds

gmalecha commented 9 years ago

This was solved by @jesper-bengtson. Pending merge.

gmalecha commented 9 years ago

This seems to require a different denotation function that unfolds the abstractions. That way we don't depend on symbols like Applicative and Traversal.

jesper-bengtson commented 9 years ago

Don't we already have a white list for exprD'?

/Jesper

21 jan 2015 kl. 14:31 skrev Gregory Malecha notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com>:

This seems to require a different denotation function that unfolds the abstractions. That way we don't depend on symbols like Applicative and Traversal.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/gmalecha/mirror-core/issues/49#issuecomment-70836506.

gmalecha commented 9 years ago

We do, but when I was looking at it, it uses too many symbols to be useful. For example, [ap] and [pure] from Applicative. When the result that you're computing mentions those as well the results don't look good.

gmalecha commented 8 years ago

In 8.5 this is pretty easy to do with a combination of Print Transparent Dependencies and cbn. It is still not optimal, we really need/want a way to package together definitions and reduce them all.