[racket] standard solution for non-terminating handin tests?

From: John Clements (clements at brinckerhoff.org)
Date: Sat Feb 11 15:18:13 EST 2012

On Feb 11, 2012, at 10:43 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:

> On Feb 11, 2012, at 1:35 PM, John Clements wrote:
>> Slightly more seriously, if you're suggesting using the design recipe to help avoid non-termination, it doesn't help the students much when they're implementing an interpreter for a turing-complete language in a PL class.
> We should teach abstract machines not interpreters. Non-termination is trivial then because you can ask them to equip the machine with fuel. And it's easier to see the compiler and its target machine. -- Matthias

I see value in interpreters in that they learn how to use structural recursion (as we discussed, this is called "much-too-late-remedial-HtDP"). However, It might be worth throwing away the second half of the course (store-passing-style, continuation-passing-style, a bit of the store monad & macros & type systems) and doing abstract machines instead. I dunno.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4624 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20120211/5bbadc3a/attachment-0001.p7s>

Posted on the users mailing list.