From: Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru>
Subject: Re: Intermixing two tagged types
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 19:11:02 +0300
Date: 2014-08-14T19:11:02+03:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <lsin2j$o5h$1@speranza.aioe.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 16a948da-f477-45a2-a6dd-be1d8c19f1d4@googlegroups.com
Adam Beneschan wrote:
> On Thursday, August 14, 2014 4:57:18 AM UTC-7, Victor Porton wrote:
>
>> Tagged types a little decrease efficiency, but I use tagged types anyway
>> (primarily for controlled finalization).
>
> I haven't been following this discussion carefully enough. So I have no
> idea whether the following suggestion is appropriate. However ...
>
> If you have an untagged record, and it has a component that is a (tagged)
> controlled type, you'll still get finalization, but using the untagged
> record as a parameter won't cause any problems with the dispatching rules.
>
> Again, I don't know whether this is helpful. I just thought I'd throw it
> out there in case it is.
Thank you for your suggestion. However I already know this.
But working this way would be a wrong way. In the meaning of things the
entire record is controlled, not its part. So controlling a part would be a
hack, not a good way to do programming.
--
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-14 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-13 20:32 Intermixing two tagged types Victor Porton
2014-08-14 7:58 ` Simon Wright
2014-08-14 11:57 ` Victor Porton
2014-08-14 12:06 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2014-08-14 16:03 ` Adam Beneschan
2014-08-14 16:11 ` Victor Porton [this message]
2014-08-14 16:29 ` Adam Beneschan
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox