Hi Christian,
I am working slowly through the required changes. Thanks for your comprehensive
answer. When I have made some more progress, I think having a call would be
nice. I'll try loading the package again from store later today.
One quick question:
As far as I understand, to extend clas
Hello Steffen,
Let's take Kotlin documentation
(https://kotlinlang.org/docs/collection-aggregate.html#fold-and-reduce)
> The difference between the two functions is that fold() takes an initial
> value and uses it as the accumulated value on the first step, whereas the
> first step of reduce()
There is no agreement between Smalltalk systems about how to
compare block contexts for equality. In Smalltalk-80 (and I
have two versions of Smalltalk-80 to compare), block equality
is identity. The same in VisualAge Smalltalk 8.6.3. The
same in GNU Smalltalk. The same in Smalltalk/X-JV.
Squea
Actually, #inject:into: is what is normally called fold or foldl,
and #reduce: is commonly called fold1. It is very confusing to
call foldl1 #fold:.
To the best of my knowledge, the name 'reduce' comes from APL.
"Z <- LO/R
has the effect of placing the function LO between adjacent pairs
of item
The standard prelude in Haskell does not define anything
called "fold". It defines fold{l,r}{,1} which can be
applied to any Foldable data (see Data.Foldable). For
technical reasons having to do with Haskell's
non-strict evaluation, foldl' and foldr' also exist.
But NOT "fold".
https://hackage.h
Great, you perfectly understood the CodeHolder!
Instance variables not present? Leave them undeclared.
Since that code never runs in this image, it does no harm. It just fills your
Undeclareds list.
Here is an example where I extend an existing class referencing a variable
(#array) only
Hi Richard!
You're completely right. Function equivalence is a beast and in the context of
a computer program undecidable for nontrivial cases. And that's a valid reason
to ban this entirely. Personally, I can also see some value in recognizing
equality in trivial cases, e.g.,
1) constant bloc
Hi Richard and Sebastian!
Interesting read. I obviously was not aware of the variety of meanings for
fold/reduce. Thanks for pointing this out. Also, in some languages it seems the
same name is used for both reductions with and without an initial value.
There's even a list on WP on the matter:
I forgot:
Is there currently a good way to test whether a block is a copying block (in
the VW meaning) in Pharo (11)? This means a block that:
- Copies only variables not changing after block creation
- Does not need the outer context for evaluation
So far did not find an obvious way. It seems t
OUCH. Wikipedia is as reliable as ever, I see.
compress and reduce aren't even close to the same thing.
Since the rank of the result of compression is the same
as the rank of the right operand, and the rank of the
result of reducing is one lower, they are really quite
different. compress is Fortr
:-D I don't know how compress made onto that site. There is not even an example
in the list of language examples where fold/reduce is named compress.
Richard O'Keefe schrieb am Donnerstag, 13. April 2023 16:34:29 (+02:00):
OUCH. Wikipedia is as reliable as ever, I see.
compress and reduce ar
The reason I came up with the naming question in the first place is that I
(finally !) finish my port of Transducers to Pharo. But currently, I am running
into a name clash. Maybe you have some good ideas how to resolve the following
situation in a pleasant way.
- #fold: exists in Pharo and is
12 matches
Mail list logo
