From b015bf73d42ab3892db75361509c4432cc8caaa9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: jim Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 04:56:29 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] update for rename of exercises/assignment7.mdwn to exercises/assignment6-7.mdwn --- exercises/assignment8-9.mdwn | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/exercises/assignment8-9.mdwn b/exercises/assignment8-9.mdwn index e6d24837..31b8c968 100644 --- a/exercises/assignment8-9.mdwn +++ b/exercises/assignment8-9.mdwn @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ The last two problems are non-monadic. will evaluate to will be `((), n, (), ())` for some number `n` between `0` and `3`. But what number is sensitive to the details of OCaml's evaluation strategy for evaluating tuple expressions. How can you avoid that dependence? That is, how can you rewrite such code to force it that the values in the 4-tuple have been evaluated left-to-right? Show us a strategy that works no matter what the expressions in the tuple are, not just these particular ones. (But you can assume that the expressions all terminate.) -11. In the evaluator code for [[Week 7 homework|/exercises/assignment7]], we left the `LetRec` portions unimplemented. How might we implement these for the second, `env`-using interpreter? One strategy would be to interpret expressions like: +11. In the evaluator code for [[Week 7 homework|/exercises/assignment6-7]], we left the `LetRec` portions unimplemented. How might we implement these for the second, `env`-using interpreter? One strategy would be to interpret expressions like: letrec f = \x. BODY in TERM -- 2.11.0