Hi there.
I get the impression someone is working on this stuff from the changes in
CVS so you probably know about these problems, but just in case (and to
prove that it is all worthwhile, for you to do this stuff), here they are:
Using the latest Win32 GHC (thanks to Reuben for the ongoing
I have experimented with the definition of class assertions in section 4.1.3
in the Haskell 98 report, and found that GHC 4.08 and GHC 5.00.1
(invoked via ``ghc -c Test.hs'') both derive and accept type arguments
(in class assertions) that do not have a variable as head.
I cannot really imagine
Hi all.
I tried to compile ghc-5.00.2 on a RedHat-7.1 system by booting from
HC files. (Actually, I have a ghc-5.00 installed, but apparently some
programs compiled with it segfault, and this makes compilation of
ghc-5.00.2 impossible. Note that I have a working happy-1.10,
however.)
Now it
I tried to compile ghc-5.00.2 on a RedHat-7.1 system by booting from
HC files. (Actually, I have a ghc-5.00 installed, but apparently some
programs compiled with it segfault, and this makes compilation of
ghc-5.00.2 impossible. Note that I have a working happy-1.10,
however.)
Now it
Hi,
My guess is that there is a space leak in your program. In both function
convert and parseAll, there are references (the variable ulf) to the
contents of the input file, and they will probably not be released until
the functions return (unless you use a compiler that is clever enough to
Hello,
After watching members of this list discussing some for me really
incomprehensible details of Haskell standard, I feel sort of silly for
asking something probably very basic, but I'd be very grateful for any answer:
Some time ago, I have decided to educate myself in functional
Bob Koutsky wrote:
remainder a b = if a b then a
else remainder (a-b) b
fix f = f (fix f)
Rewrite remainder using fix so that it is not recursive.
Function fix left me completely puzzled. With
Thomas Hallgren wrote
There seems to be a similar problem with qualified identifiers. The
production for lexeme includes varid, conid, etc, rather than qvarid,
qconid, etc. (Perhaps someone forgot to update it when qualified names
were introduced, in Haskell 1.3...)
Sorry we must have a
Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:23:30 -0700, Mark P Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
I guess the intention here is that:
symbol - ascSymbol | uniSymbol_special | _ | : | | '
Right.
In fact, since all the characters in ascSymbol are either
punctuation or symbols in Unicode, the inclusion of
From: Bob Koutsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:49:33 +0200
[...] suddenly, I hit a wall:
Exercise 9.9:
remainder a b = if a b then a
else remainder (a-b) b
fix f = f (fix f)
From: Dylan Thurston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:57:54 -0400
On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 06:30:30AM -0700, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Someone else, quoted by Simon, attribution elided by Dylan, wrote:
| 2.2. Identifiers can use small and large Unicode letters.
| What about
24 Jul 2001 12:04:33 -, Lars Henrik Mathiesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Now, anything that's defined as x = f x is called a fixpoint of f.
It's possible to prove that there's only one (when f is a Haskell
function, at least) so we can talk of 'the' fixpoint.
Not necessarily only one, e.g.
From: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 24 Jul 2001 13:05:25 GMT
24 Jul 2001 12:04:33 -, Lars Henrik Mathiesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Now, anything that's defined as x = f x is called a fixpoint of f.
It's possible to prove that there's only one (when f is a
In section 5.5.1 the report states that a top-level declaration brings
into scope qualified and unqualified names. Thus, the following
declaration is legal:
module Foo where
ones = 1 : Foo.ones
However, in section 2.4 the report says External names may optionally be
qualified in
Wolfgang Lux wrote:
Thomas Hallgren wrote
There seems to be a similar problem with qualified identifiers. The
production for lexeme includes varid, conid, etc, rather than qvarid,
qconid, etc.
Sorry we must have a different version of the report, but in my copy
and also in the version on
Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
BTW, a better definition than
fix f = f (fix f)
is
fix f = let x = f x in x
because it increases sharing, avoiding recomputation.
The latter definition is more likely to give you sharing, but Haskell
gives you no such guarantees. There are also
Okay, I understand the problem. I would do something like the solution
you propose, except that in the input file, trees span multiple lines. So
the input file looks something like:
(:cat S
:subs ((() (:cat NP
:subs ((() (:surf John)
(() (:cat VP
:subs
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
program - {lexeme | whitespace }
lexeme - varid | conid | varsym | consym | literal | special |
reservedop | reservedid
There is no reference to qualified names here. I thought the purpose of
these productions were to say that a Haskell program is correct
Hi,
I am extremely new to Haskell. This will be my
first question, so go easy. I have just read Chapter 1 on Simon Thompson's
book.
for example a function declaration is given as
follows
scale : : Picture - Int -
Picture
If the first two types are input variables why does
the syntax
Actually, all functions in Haskell take only one argument, although the
people writing the program usually don't think of it this
way.
scale
could alternatively have been defined with type
scale :: (Picture, Int) - Picture
which
looks more like what we would expect in a function of two
At 3:07 PM -0500 7/24/01, Cagdas Ozgenc wrote:
Hi, I am extremely new to Haskell. This will be my first question,
so go easy. I have just read Chapter 1 on Simon Thompson's book.
for example a function declaration is given as follows
scale : : Picture - Int - Picture
If
this should be on a list of the 10 first questions someone will ask when
learning haskell. I have introduced several friends to the language and
they all seem to ask the same things, if not always in the same order..
whats the deal with Int - Int - Int ... (currying)
what does $ mean? is it
Function fix is a so-called fixpoint operator. Theory says that you can
formulate any computable function using only non-recursive definitions
plus fix.
Could someone point me toward a proof of this?
Furthermore, can any computable function be expressed in this form:
fix u
where u is some
Hello,
Is it possible in Haskell to access the underlying machine bit representation of a
Float or Double value?
I need to be able to be able to send this bit representation as a list of bytes in
network byte order to a process running on a different platform (with a different host
byte
At 2001-07-24 16:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible in Haskell to access the underlying machine bit
representation of a Float or Double value?
If you mean the _actual_ bit representation, then I hope not! But maybe
there should be (or are) functions for converting such values to
---
If you are not interested in video compressing we do appologize sending you
this email. You can unsubscribe by clicking the following link:
http://www.video2flash.com/cgi-bin/un.cgi?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Is it possible in Haskell to access the underlying machine bit representation of a
Float or Double value?
I need to be able to be able to send this bit representation as a list of bytes in
network byte order to a process running on a different platform
On 2001-07-24T16:51:54-0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Is it possible in Haskell to access the underlying machine bit
representation of a Float or Double value?
I need to be able to be able to send this bit representation as a
list of bytes in network byte order to a process
28 matches
Mail list logo
