|
|
|
|
|
by ALLTaken
1807 days ago
|
|
I missed the first part, but will check it out. I'm on sick leave and can't do anything anyway. My main question so far is: Can you make use of the speed of Array-based languages, but save computation time, by compiling it into a solution-graph-assembly? Sorry, if my wording is to amateurish. EDIT:
What's the difference between symbolic computation, graph computation and array-based symbolic computation? I mean they have different internal representations due to semantics, but look alike mostly. Would it be possible to "generate" an "optimal" internal structure for an array-based symbolic language like APL, based on the input? |
|
I don't know if your wording is too amateurish because you are using lingo outside of my knowledge. Does "make use of the speed of array-based language, but save computation time by compiling" refer to using an array language that is compiled? [Co-dfns](https://github.com/co-dfns/co-dfns) compiles a dialect of APL, so that might be interesting to you.