[racket] Mutable state vs RAM on fire

From: joshua at anwu.org (joshua at anwu.org)
Date: Wed May 2 18:59:12 EDT 2012

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.

(I haven't quite made it through Okasaki's text yet. ^_^)

Posted on the users mailing list.