Peter Schachte

So this would essentially create a "hole" (or maybe "shadow" is a better metaphor) in the use of a resource. I'm not sure why this would be useful. Can you...

That's an interesting example, Paul, not something I've thought about. To use something like `disuse` for this purpose, you'd need each function that needs access to the `PWDB` to declare...

If you have some "sensitive" value that you don't want widely shared, you shouldn't put it in a resource. So the motivating example for a `disuse` statement would need to...

That's what I assumed the semantics of `disuse` would be. I agree that `disuse` makes sense, except that we can't currently implement it (because of resources in HO code). Can't...

> Why couldn't we handle HO resources as we currently do, in that we can't stop a HO term from using a resource. > >In essence, a HO term can...

For this case, I would expect to write this: ``` ?lst = [1,2,3] head(lst) = ?h | error "head of empty list" ``` I'm not sure if this works, but...

`head(lst, ?h, _)` had better not be allowed, since ?h won't be bound if the call to `head` fails. If the Wybe compiler doesn't reject it, that's a bug. Anyway,...

This is also an issue for compile time garbage collection. Mutate instructions contain the size of the structure, and offset, and the size of the field being overwritten, so it...

Thanks, James, for giving a detailed reply! One other issue that comes into this is that Wybe allows "backwards" dataflow. For example, a call like ``` foo(bar(?baz)) = quux ```...

My thought for disambiguating was to just not allow partial application of procedures/functions with optional arguments. I don't know R, so I don't understand its approach, but the mention of...