Re^5: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined? (why not?)

Yeah... it's the closest we get to it. What I really wish we had was not only undefined execution order but *delayed*execution* so nothing actually ran until you really needed it.

⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊

Comment on Re^5: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined? (why not?)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined? (why not?) by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jul 15, 2006 at 00:06 UTC
Is this something planned for Perl6? I know it will have lazy lists.	[reply]
Re^6: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined? (why not?) by Anonymous Monk on Jul 15, 2006 at 00:07 UTC
Be careful what you wish for. Haskell has lazy evaluation, but it is extremely easy to create a program plagued with space leaks. And if you eliminate the automatic memoization, you'll end up turning your space leaks into time leaks.	[reply]
Re^7: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined? (why not?) by diotalevi (Canon) on Jul 15, 2006 at 00:10 UTC
Oh genie? I wish for sanity too. There are places in real code that I want this to happen. ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊	[reply]
Re^8: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined? (why not?) by Anonymous Monk on Jul 15, 2006 at 01:54 UTC
I wish for sanity too. There are places in real code that I want this to happen. Delayed evaluation in Perl is spelled `sub`.	[reply] [d/l]