| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The accumulator implementation was wrong because it forgot (in accumAdd)
to take into account that values may be variably-sized. Furthermore, it
was also complexity-inefficient because it did not build up a sparse
value. Thus let's go for the Haskell-interpreter-equivalent of what a
real, fast, compiled implementation would do: just a tree with mutable
variables. In practice one can decide to indeed flatten parts of that
tree, i.e. using a tree representation for nested pairs is bad, but that
should have been done _before_ execution and for _all_ occurrences of
that type fragment, not live at runtime by the accumulator
implementation.
|
