On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, jasonm wrote: > Jacques Carette wrote: > > > >> perhaps i was mistaken in thinking that there is a group of > >> math-interested > >> haskellers out there discussing, developing, and documenting the area? or > >> perhaps that group needs introductory tutorials presenting its work? > > My guess is that there are a number of people "waiting in the wings", > > waiting for a critical mass of features to show up before really diving > > in. See > > http://www.cas.mcmaster.ca/plmms07/ > > for my reasons for being both interested and wary). > > > > Probably the simplest test case is the difficulties that people are > > (still) encountering doing matrix/vector algebra in Haskell. One either > > quickly encounters efficiency issues (although PArr might help), or > > typing issues (though many tricks are known, but not necessarily > > simple). Blitz++ and the STL contributed heavily to C++ being taken > > seriously by people in the scientific computation community. Haskell > > has even more _potential_, but it is definitely unrealised potential. > > I am one of those mathematicians "waiting in the wings." Haskell looked > very appealing at first, and the type system seems perfect, especially for > things like multilinear algebra where currying and duality is fundamental. > I too was put off by the Num issues though--strange mixture of sophisticated > category theory and lack of a sensible hierarchy of algebraic objects. > > However, I've decided I'm more interested in helping to fix it than wait; > so count me in on an effort to make Haskell more mathematical. For me that > probably starts with the semigroup/group/ring setup, and good > arbitrary-precision as well as approximate linear algebra support.
NumericPrelude popped up in this thread earlier. Is this the starting point you are after? http://darcs.haskell.org/numericprelude/ _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe