1 Export

@misc{citeulike:4119622, abstract = {Abstract. In lazy functional languages, ? is typically an element of every type. While this provides great flexibility, it also comes at a cost. In this paper we explore the consequences of allowing unpointed types in a lazy functional language like Haskell. We use the type (and class) system to keep track of pointedness, and show the consequences for parametricity and for controlling evaluation order and unboxing. 1}, author = {Launchbury, John and Paterson, Ross}, citeulike-article-id = {4119622}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.38.7528}, keywords = {haskell, lazy-evaluation, unboxed-types}, posted-at = {2009-03-02 15:39:19}, priority = {0}, title = {1}, url = {http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.38.7528} }

TY - ELEC ID - citeulike:4119622 L3 - citeulike-article-id:4119622 N2 - Abstract. In lazy functional languages, ? is typically an element of every type. While this provides great flexibility, it also comes at a cost. In this paper we explore the consequences of allowing unpointed types in a lazy functional language like Haskell. We use the type (and class) system to keep track of pointedness, and show the consequences for parametricity and for controlling evaluation order and unboxing. 1 TI - 1 KW - haskell KW - lazy-evaluation KW - unboxed-types AU - Launchbury, John AU - Paterson, Ross UR - http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.38.7528 ER -