[Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
Kemps-Benedix Torsten torsten.kemps-bene...@sks-ub.de wrote: Hello, but to specify that ___this function turns a list into its sorted equivalent___ would probably require to specify e.g. sort in terms of the type system and to write code that actually does the sorting. The first task is much like specifying what a sorted list is in first-order-logic (much like a Prolog program) and the second task is a regular functional program. If this is correct, dependent types would become more useful if the first task could be done by the compiler - which is probably impossible in general. Am I right? Have a look at http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~wss/Publications/ThePowerOfPi.pdf http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~txa/publ/pisigma.pdf http://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/sjt/TTFP/ You probably want to give type signatures... as you want the compiler to help you to construct a valid proof of what you claimed in it. It isn't much help if the compiler just tells you that code you gave, it denotes _|_, if you get my meaning. -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
Hi, Henning Thielemann wrote: Daniel Kraft wrote: I noticed last year Haskell.org was a mentoring organization for Google's Summer of Code, and I barely noticed some discussion about it applying again this year :) I participated for GCC in 2008 and would like to try again this year; while I'm still active for GCC and will surely stay so, I'd like to see something new at least for GSoC. And Haskell.org would surely be a very, very nice organization. Since I discovered there's more than just a lot of imperative languages that are nearly all the same, I love to do some programming in Prolog, Scheme and of course Haskell. However, so far this was only some toy programs and nothing really useful; I'd like to change this (as well as learning more about Haskell during the projects). - A basic symbolic maths package; I've no idea how far one could do this as a single GSoC project, but it would surely be a very interesting task. Alternatively or in combination, one could try to use an existing free CAS package as engine. DoCon? hm, I've only read a little on their webpage; what I was thinking of was to implement a very basic package just to do some symbolic integration or equation solving to be embedded in some other calculation, and DoCon sounds like a more abstract, mathematical system. So maybe there could still be some interest in a basic symbolic expression package that could be backed by a CAS library like GiNaC or some other one (better yet, pluggable) instead of imlementing a full CAS itself. Daniel ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Daniel Kraft wrote: Henning Thielemann wrote: DoCon? hm, I've only read a little on their webpage; what I was thinking of was to implement a very basic package just to do some symbolic integration or equation solving to be embedded in some other calculation, and DoCon sounds like a more abstract, mathematical system. So maybe there could still be some interest in a basic symbolic expression package that could be backed by a CAS library like GiNaC or some other one (better yet, pluggable) instead of imlementing a full CAS itself. So it seems to be useful to make the distinction: * Computer algebra is doing advanced arithmetic on advanced mathematical objects like polynomials, Galois groups, function compositions (for integration). This is what DoCon is about (integration excluded). * Symbolic manipulation is what you are after, where symbolic manipulation often involves computer algebra behind the scenes (i.e. translating symbolic expressions to polynomials, function compositions) ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
Wolfgang Jeltsch g9ks1...@acme.softbase.org wrote: Am Mittwoch, 11. Februar 2009 18:51 schrieb Don Stewart: For example, if all the haddocks on hackage.org were a wiki, and interlinked, every single package author would benefit, as would all users. You mean, everyone should be able to mess about with my documentation? This would be similar to give everyone commit rights to my repositories or allow everyone to edit the code of my published libraries. What is the good thing about that? The fact that you can mark a revision to be the official one and, in case you e.g. have a wiki yourself, disable the hackage wiki? -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote: Don Stewart wrote: For example, if all the haddocks on hackage.org were a wiki, and interlinked, every single package author would benefit, as would all users. You mean, everyone should be able to mess about with my documentation? This would be similar to give everyone commit rights to my repositories or allow everyone to edit the code of my published libraries. What is the good thing about that? Well, it's excellent if you haven't written said documentation yet. ;) But yes, the package author should have the last word about what goes in and what does not. The goal is simply to drastically lower the bar of participation. Regards, apfelmus -- http://apfelmus.nfshost.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Heinrich Apfelmus apfel...@quantentunnel.de wrote: Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote: Don Stewart wrote: For example, if all the haddocks on hackage.org were a wiki, and interlinked, every single package author would benefit, as would all users. You mean, everyone should be able to mess about with my documentation? This would be similar to give everyone commit rights to my repositories or allow everyone to edit the code of my published libraries. What is the good thing about that? Well, it's excellent if you haven't written said documentation yet. ;) But yes, the package author should have the last word about what goes in and what does not. The goal is simply to drastically lower the bar of participation. Something like AnnoCPAN would be a good middle-ground here; i.e. differentiate between official package documentation and user annotations, but make them both visible. Luke ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
Don Stewart wrote: No one said anything about unrestricted commit rights ... we're not crazy ... what if it were more like, say, RWH's wiki .. where comments go to editors to encorporate ... By the way, the PHP documentation has such a comment feature, see for example http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.preg-match.php But I'm not sure whether this form of commenting is the best way to write/improve documentation. (The many proposed regular expressions for validating e-mail addresses sure have a certain hilarity to them...) Regards, apfelmus -- http://apfelmus.nfshost.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
Am Donnerstag, 12. Februar 2009 09:20 schrieb Achim Schneider: Wolfgang Jeltsch g9ks1...@acme.softbase.org wrote: Am Mittwoch, 11. Februar 2009 18:51 schrieb Don Stewart: For example, if all the haddocks on hackage.org were a wiki, and interlinked, every single package author would benefit, as would all users. You mean, everyone should be able to mess about with my documentation? This would be similar to give everyone commit rights to my repositories or allow everyone to edit the code of my published libraries. What is the good thing about that? The fact that you can mark a revision to be the official one and, in case you e.g. have a wiki yourself, disable the hackage wiki? What do you mean by “disabling the Hackage wiki”? Best wishes, Wolfgang ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
Wolfgang Jeltsch g9ks1...@acme.softbase.org wrote: Am Donnerstag, 12. Februar 2009 09:20 schrieb Achim Schneider: Wolfgang Jeltsch g9ks1...@acme.softbase.org wrote: Am Mittwoch, 11. Februar 2009 18:51 schrieb Don Stewart: For example, if all the haddocks on hackage.org were a wiki, and interlinked, every single package author would benefit, as would all users. You mean, everyone should be able to mess about with my documentation? This would be similar to give everyone commit rights to my repositories or allow everyone to edit the code of my published libraries. What is the good thing about that? The fact that you can mark a revision to be the official one and, in case you e.g. have a wiki yourself, disable the hackage wiki? What do you mean by ___disabling the Hackage wiki___? Well, disabling the wiki function of the documentation on hackage and redirect to somewhere else, instead. The point is that it's certainly possible to have some maintainer-guaranteed integrity and the possibility of low-barrier contributions at the same time. -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org GSoC
Am Donnerstag, 12. Februar 2009 10:49 schrieb Luke Palmer: Something like AnnoCPAN would be a good middle-ground here; i.e. differentiate between official package documentation and user annotations, but make them both visible. And give visitors of the Hackage website the choice to not see the comments at all. Best wishes, Wolfgang ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
