Conversation

An observation from my Haskell effect system project: inductive data structures are awesome, but as soon as you want your inductive data structure to be represented in memory as something other than a linked list, all of Haskell’s nice type system features go out the window.
4
84
Are there any languages that can decouple logical representation from physical representation in this way? The only language I can think of that might be able to do it is ATS, but I don’t know ATS. Can I write an inductive GADT that is represented as a packed array in ATS?
16
36
I have often thought about this - about ways to decouple the declarative structure from the physical representation. I want to be able to declare my inductive type, but also have multiple ways of translating that into some target memory layout in a way that's not too onerous.
1
3
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
Yeah, I’m still unsure how one might handle the multiple forms of modal necessity that you might want in a single systems lang. Like usage count, stage, free variables, etc. Trying to learn how Granule does it 🤔
and I were discussing similar ideas, seeing if the modality in twitter.com/dannygratzer/s might work for this kind of staging. Unfortunately con_nat [pg9] is not very staging-friendly, and it's not clear how to rule it out in a reasonable way.
Quote Tweet
I'll be talking about Implementing a Modal Dependent Type Theory, looking forward to seeing people there! preprint: jozefg.github.io/papers/2019-im
Show this thread
1
Show replies