From 3a0ce128bb7bc501eeef368d2406d26b9652a8f3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matthijs Kooijman Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 10:48:10 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Make a small start on the state annotations section. --- Chapters/HardwareDescription.tex | 2 +- Chapters/Prototype.tex | 4 ++++ 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Chapters/HardwareDescription.tex b/Chapters/HardwareDescription.tex index f5c0eaa..24afd89 100644 --- a/Chapters/HardwareDescription.tex +++ b/Chapters/HardwareDescription.tex @@ -885,7 +885,7 @@ acc in s = (s', out) \todo{Sidenote: One or more state arguments?} - \subsection{Explicit state annotation} + \subsection[sec:description:stateann]{Explicit state annotation} To make our stateful descriptions unambigious and easier to translate, we need some way for the developer to describe which arguments and results are intended to become stateful. diff --git a/Chapters/Prototype.tex b/Chapters/Prototype.tex index 139b93e..67d23c8 100644 --- a/Chapters/Prototype.tex +++ b/Chapters/Prototype.tex @@ -681,6 +681,10 @@ here)}. \section[sec:prototype:statetype]{State annotations in Haskell} + As noted in \in{section}[sec:description:stateann], Cλash needs some + way to let the programmer explicitly specify which of a function's + arguments and which part of a function's result represent the + function's state. \fxnote{This entire section on state annotations should be reviewed} Ideal: Type synonyms, since there is no additional code overhead for -- 2.30.2