Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!csrd.uiuc.edu!sp10.csrd.uiuc.edu!harrison
From: harrison@sp10.csrd.uiuc.edu (Luddy Harrison)
Subject: Re: Scheme _in_ Emacs?
In-Reply-To: blume@beth.princeton.edu's message of Tue, 6 Sep 1994 01:28:14 GMT
Message-ID: <HARRISON.94Sep6073326@sp10.csrd.uiuc.edu>
Followup-To: comp.lang.scheme
Sender: news@csrd.uiuc.edu
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
References: <RAMSDELL.94Aug17063434@triad.mitre.org> <TTHORN.94Aug17150829@ceres.daimi>
	<RAMSDELL.94Aug24085039@triad.mitre.org>
	<WGD.94Aug25012615@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
	<TFB.94Aug31020302@oliphant.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
	<WGD.94Sep3205634@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
	<TFB.94Sep5132531@burns.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
	<HARRISON.94Sep5085451@sp10.csrd.uiuc.edu>
	<BLUME.94Sep5110232@beth.princeton.edu>
	<HARRISON.94Sep5193413@sp10.csrd.uiuc.edu>
	<BLUME.94Sep5212814@beth.princeton.edu>
Date: 06 Sep 1994 12:33:25 GMT
Lines: 26

Somewhat heatedly, Matthias Blume writes:

> 
>   B) We could stack the activation records and implement the inner lambda
>   like a nested function in Pascal.

>>We could do this, but such an implementation would not be
>>standard-conforming.

It would not be standard-conforming, even if the compiler could
prove that it would take less space and time than the standard-conforming
version?

>   C) (Being very fancy:) we could recognize the underlying recurrence relation
>      x[n] = x[n-1]*n
>      x[1] = 1
>      and build a parallel computation that solved the problem in log(N) space,
>      and log(N) time.

>>log(N) space is certainly not allowed for a conforming implementation.

But log(N) space might be very little for a parallel computer; if it
resulted in a big speedup, but did not deplete available memory, would
it still be a violation of the standard?

-Luddy Harrison
