On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 05:12:50PM -0400, Danny Yoo wrote: > > In the functional version of poly-mul, why doesn't it call poly-simp? > I'm concerned that if you leave the simplification up to the very end, > it might not be as effective as if it were being done all the time. >
I wondered also if I should simplify in-between each multiplication. Then I didn't. :) > > I think what's being compared is not truly dependent on the language > implementation, but rather on the functional vs. imperative models and > data representations. > Totally. The only reason I mentioned Perl and Javascript was that I knew Racket could beat them if I switched to a mutable vector. Now my curiousity is whether a purely functional data structure could match it. tk (I haven't quite made it through Okasaki's text yet. ^_^) ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
