remove SafeRecursion #789
Merged
remove SafeRecursion #789
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
MichaelRawson
commented
Dec 5, 2025
| } | ||
| } | ||
| // memoising structure used in convertFO below | ||
| // TODO: should this be provided as part of the BUE machinery? |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@joe-hauns - this is just Memo::Hash but with a DHMap instead of a Map. Perhaps you have some idea to abstract this?
At some point the two should just be the same container, but we're a way off from there.
Contributor
Author
|
@quickbeam123 found some problems we lose with this (?!) so I'm looking into this. |
MichaelRawson
force-pushed
the
michael-safe-recursion
branch
from
51f8a7e to
2448e94
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
SafeRecursioncan be modelled withBottomUpEvaluationand is only used in one place. Replace it and removeSafeRecursion.There is an intermediate commit which I used to test that the two implementations agree. Also, I found a bug in
BottomUpEvaluationwhere it doesn't respectignoreTypeArgsforTermList, fix that.