haskell Is the expression (_, 'b') in Normal Form? in Weak Head
Weak Head Normal Form. Web reduce terms to weak normal forms only. Alonzo church was alan turing’s doctoral advisor, and his lambda calculus predates turing machines.
haskell Is the expression (_, 'b') in Normal Form? in Weak Head
Normal form means, the expression will be fully evaluated. Alonzo church was alan turing’s doctoral advisor, and his lambda calculus predates turing machines. Web reduce terms to weak normal forms only. Web weak head normal form. Web the first argument of seq is not guaranteed to be evaluated before the second argument. The first argument of seq will only be evaluated to weak head normal form. Web weak head normal form. So, seq forced the list to be evaluated but not the components that make. A term in weak head normal form is either a term in head normal form or a lambda abstraction. Therefore, every normal form expression is also in weak head normal form, though the opposite does not hold in general.
Seq is defined as follows. Reduction strategies [ edit ] The first argument of seq will only be evaluated to weak head normal form. Normal form means, the expression will be fully evaluated. Web weak head normal form. Web reduce terms to weak normal forms only. But then i read this wikipedia article where whnf is defined for the lambda calculus as follows: Web there is also the notion of weak head normal form: Now, i have following expression: But more importantly, working through the theory from its original viewpoint exposes us to different ways of thinking. So, seq forced the list to be evaluated but not the components that make.
