I didn't have a particular Turing-complete type system in mind -- I knew that some research languages had that property, and that it wasn't considered a per-se crazy thing to do.
I don't actually see why "parsing is/can be as hard as evaluation" is necessarily a problem. This seems like one of those very loose lower bounds we get a lot in CS -- where some problem has very hard instances, but in practice, the instances we care about are generally OK.
This is certainly an implementational headache, and a limitation for people who want to do program analysis, but I don't see it as directly relevant users. This property limits the variety and power of perl-analysis tools, but if I was dissatisfied with the offerings out there, I shouldn't be using perl anyway.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-08-13 06:21 pm (UTC)I don't actually see why "parsing is/can be as hard as evaluation" is necessarily a problem. This seems like one of those very loose lower bounds we get a lot in CS -- where some problem has very hard instances, but in practice, the instances we care about are generally OK.
This is certainly an implementational headache, and a limitation for people who want to do program analysis, but I don't see it as directly relevant users. This property limits the variety and power of perl-analysis tools, but if I was dissatisfied with the offerings out there, I shouldn't be using perl anyway.