You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
@the-real-blackh Does the Haskell denotational semantics attempt to follow the causality rule? I.e. do operators attempt not to rely on future times t1 > t when computing an event or value at time t?
I can see more than one place when such non-causality actually happens and I'm wondering if I should point out those places, or if it was a non-goal for the semantics to be strictly causal.
In practice, non-causality means that evaluating a Haskell FRP system, involving loops and using the defined primitives, diverges (enters infinite computation; hangs) when it shouldn't.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@the-real-blackh Does the Haskell denotational semantics attempt to follow the causality rule? I.e. do operators attempt not to rely on future times
t1 > t
when computing an event or value at timet
?I can see more than one place when such non-causality actually happens and I'm wondering if I should point out those places, or if it was a non-goal for the semantics to be strictly causal.
In practice, non-causality means that evaluating a Haskell FRP system, involving loops and using the defined primitives, diverges (enters infinite computation; hangs) when it shouldn't.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: