[DGD] lambda operator re-re-visited?

[Carter Cheng]

Do you have a better suggestion?

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 2:19 AM, Raymond Jennings <shentino at gmail.com> wrote:

> Please please please oh please do not use line numbers as discriminants.
>
> Source code is VERY mutable, and even a reformatting can change things.
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 3:53 AM, Carter Cheng <cartercheng at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Actually I do not see it as that heuristical once the discriminant is
> added
> > the identifier is unique. Also basically programs are identified by file
> > name in the common case already. So you would have something like
> > filename#line number.discriminant for a given program and any object
> would
> > include the additional object number.. The discriminant is to
> differentiate
> > between two "closures" originating from the same line.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Felix A. Croes <felix at dworkin.nl> wrote:
> >
> > > Carter Cheng <cartercheng at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think breaking the anonymity a bit for the purposes of
> recompilation
> > > > might be a possible solution. I.e. associating something like a file
> > path
> > > > and line number with some extra discriminant to each closure's
> metadata
> > > and
> > > > having a way to locate the anonymous functions associated with a
> given
> > > > piece of source.
> > >
> > > Giving up the anonymity would be a solution, but what you are proposing
> > > is just a heuristic.  I doubt that it will be so easy.  It would be no
> > > good if a failing testcase can be constructed for it.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Felix Croes
> > > ____________________________________________
> > > https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd
> > >
> > ____________________________________________
> > https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd
> ____________________________________________
> https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd
>