Explanation
In most non-strict languages the non-strictness extends to data constructors. This allows conceptually infinite data structures (such as the list of all prime numbers) to be manipulated in the same way as ordinary finite data structures. It also allows for the use of very large but finite data structures such as the complete game tree of chess.
Non-strictness has several disadvantages which have prevented widespread adoption:
- Because of the uncertainty regarding if and when expressions will be evaluated, non-strict languages generally must be purely functional to be useful.
- All hardware architectures in common use are optimized for strict languages, so the best compilers for non-strict languages produce slower code than the best compilers for strict languages, with the notable exception of the Glasgow Haskell Compiler which outperforms many strict language compilers.
- Space complexity of non-strict programs is difficult to understand and predict.
Strict programming languages are often associated with eager evaluation, and non-strict languages with lazy evaluation, but other evaluation strategies are possible in each case. The terms "eager programming language" and "lazy programming language" are often used as synonyms for "strict programming language" and "non-strict programming language" respectively.
In many strict languages, some advantages of non-strict functions can be obtained through the use of macros or thunks.
Read more about this topic: Strict Programming Language
Famous quotes containing the word explanation:
“Auden, MacNeice, Day Lewis, I have read them all,
Hoping against hope to hear the authentic call . . .
And know the explanation I must pass is this
MYou cannot light a match on a crumbling wall.”
—Hugh MacDiarmid (1892–1978)
“There is no explanation for evil. It must be looked upon as a necessary part of the order of the universe. To ignore it is childish, to bewail it senseless.”
—W. Somerset Maugham (1874–1965)
“There is a great deal of unmapped country within us which would have to be taken into account in an explanation of our gusts and storms.”
—George Eliot [Mary Ann (or Marian)