Refactor numerics with higher-order functions #118
Merged
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
Collaborator
|
Now the interpreter backends support the def parameter! To keep it simple, This is based on the assumption that the normal variables in SpecTec never starts with "$". |
Collaborator
Author
|
Cool, thanks @f52985! |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There is a lot of code duplication in the numerics implementation. This PR simplifies that by factoring out much of the logic into higher-order functions. This is just a start, we can probably simplify further.
However, this is the first use of def's as parameters, which the interpreter does not support yet.
@ShinWonho, @f52985, this PR isn't high priority. Just putting it out there so that you can have a look in case you have spare cycles. :)