Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!mintaka!spdcc!iecc!compilers-sender From: brm@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Brian R. Murphy) Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Static type-checking with dynamic scoping Keywords: types, design, Lisp, ML Message-ID: <9101172315.AA28015@Neon.Stanford.EDU> Date: 17 Jan 91 23:15:18 GMT References: <1191Jan16.185311.3771@Think.COM> Sender: compilers-sender@iecc.cambridge.ma.us Reply-To: Brian R. Murphy Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University Lines: 21 Approved: compilers@iecc.cambridge.ma.us > Does this work even when side-effects to dynamically-bound variables are > allowed, e.g. This should be closely related to how ML would handle side-effects to variables. I'm not really sure how this happens (haven't done type inference for non-functional languages). The problems of type inference for Lisp are actually quite a bit more complex. You could probably do something like what Alex Aiken and I did for FL (described pretty abstractly in our POPL paper which will be presented next week, Type Inference in a Typeless Language, in more detail in my 1990 MIT MS thesis). The mechanism we used should be fairly easily extensible to variable side-effecting, but would suffer from terrible performance problems without further improvements. Does anyone know a reference for how ML handles side-effects to variables? -Brian -- Send compilers articles to compilers@iecc.cambridge.ma.us or {ima | spdcc | world}!iecc!compilers. Meta-mail to compilers-request.