Received: from acsn03.bu.edu (acsn03.bu.edu [128.197.159.63]) by cs.bu.edu (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h9646HbH006820 for <cs320@cs.bu.edu>; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 00:06:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from BPATTON (bays200-0b01-dhcp173.bu.edu [168.122.253.173]) by acsn03.bu.edu ((8.9.3p2.buoit.v1.3)/BU_Server-1.3) with SMTP id AAA80584; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 00:06:03 -0400 Message-ID: <000401c38bbf$281efe00$adfd7aa8@BPATTON> From: "Brian Patton" <bjp@bu.edu> To: "Rui Shi" <shearer@cs.bu.edu> Cc: <cs320@cs.bu.edu> References: <Pine.SOL.4.20.0310051933540.23935-100000@csa.bu.edu> Subject: Re: Problem 3, hw 5 Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 00:06:02 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Length: 2198 Status: RO X-Mozilla-Status: 8019 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 X-UIDL: 3f7de3fb0000006c
More on this:
Question for Problem #3... my rename function is allowing two a_0's to exist
in the same level
My question is:
; Is it necessary to avoid translating
; (+ (sigma i 1 2 i) (sigma j 2 7 j))
; TO
; (+ (sigma a_0 1 2 a_0) (sigma a_0 2 7 a_0)) ????
Should it be translated to (+ (sigma a_0 1 2 a_0) (sigma a_1 2 7 a_1))
instead, or does it matter since one is not embedded within the other?
Whether need to rename i and j depends on the reserved-var-names. If i or
j occurs in it, they should be renamed.
Assuming both i and j are in reserved-var-names, what should be the output?
Is (+ (sigma a_0 1 2 a_0) (sigma a_0 2 7 a_0)) acceptable (much easier)
Or is (+ (sigma a_0 1 2 a_0) (sigma a_1 2 7 a_1)) the expected output?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rui Shi" <shearer@cs.bu.edu>
To: "Brian Patton" <bjp@bu.edu>
Cc: <cs320@cs.bu.edu>
Sent: Sunday, October 5, 2003 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: Problem 3, hw 5
>
>
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2003, Brian Patton wrote:
>
> > Question for Problem #3... my rename function is allowing two a_0's to
exist
> > in the same level
> > My question is:
> >
> > ; Is it necessary to avoid translating
> > ; (+ (sigma i 1 2 i) (sigma j 2 7 j))
> > ; TO
> > ; (+ (sigma a_0 1 2 a_0) (sigma a_0 2 7 a_0)) ????
> >
> > Should it be translated to (+ (sigma a_0 1 2 a_0) (sigma a_1 2 7 a_1))
> > instead, or does it matter since one is not embedded within the other?
>
> Whether need to rename i and j depends on the reserved-var-names. If i or
> j occurs in it, they should be renamed.
>
> >
> > Additionally, my understanding is that
> > (sigma i 1 2 (sigma i 4 7 (* 2 i)))
> > should be translated to
> > (sigma a_0 1 2 (sigma a_1 4 7 (* 2 a_1)))
> > because the reference to a_1 is embedded within the scope of a_0
> > and the idea is to make our substitution model easier to handle.
>
> Yes!
>
> TF
> >
>
> > Please clarify, correct, criticize these ideas.
> > -Brian
> >
> > -~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
> > BRIAN PATTON
> > http://people.bu.edu/bjp
> > http://people.bu.edu/reallife
> > BrianWa84@hotmail.com
> > Phone: 360.903.9003
> > AIM: BrianWA84
> >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 21 2005 - 12:17:02 EST