[Not subscribed to haskell-users so please copy me the answers.]
To compile the revision control system Darcs (http://www.darcs.net/),
I need Haskell but I'm not myself a Haskell user.
My machine is an UltraSparc 10 running NetBSD 1.6.2 userland and 2.0
kernel.
There is a package source for
On 15 November 2004 21:16, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
[Not subscribed to haskell-users so please copy me the answers.]
To compile the revision control system Darcs (http://www.darcs.net/),
I need Haskell but I'm not myself a Haskell user.
My machine is an UltraSparc 10 running NetBSD
[ moved to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
On 16 November 2004 07:51, Fred Nicolier wrote:
I have some packages for doing signal and image processing stuff.
Here is a little test program :
\begin{code}
module Main where
import Hips
a = listSignal (1,10) [1..10]
b = liftSignals (:+) a a
c = fft
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (snipped):
The running example includes an ORD class -- which is like the Ord
class but can be parameterized by a comparison function, so to
speak.
This is precisely the problem. Rather than being able to use the existing
functions, you have to haul around an extra
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote (snipped):
If more than one dictionary is allowed per type, this correspondence
breaks down, and all hell breaks loose as a result. We've already seen
this happen with implicit parameters. In a program with implicit
parameters:
* Beta conversion no longer preserves
George Russell wrote:
Since it hasn't been mentioned yet I should also point people once
again to Functional Pearl: Implicit Configurations by Oleg and
Chung-chieh
Shan, which ingeniously uses polymorphic recursion to construct type
class instances at run time. If there's a safe and sane way to
George Russell wrote:
Sorry, but I like implicit parameters, I use them, and I'm not going
to stop using them because beta conversion no longer preserves semantics.
You'll find that many people here don't agree with this view in general
(though there's been surprisingly little backlash against
Hi all,
Is there a good reason why I can't say
data Bar = Bar { _ :: Int, _ :: Char, x :: Bool }
?
(Or data Bar = Bar { Int, Char, x :: Bool } if you prefer, but that's
susceptible to typos of the x, y, z :: Int syntax causing confusion).
I have a large datastructure in which there is one
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:04:02 +, Ian Lynagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Is there a good reason why I can't say
data Bar = Bar { _ :: Int, _ :: Char, x :: Bool }
?
(Or data Bar = Bar { Int, Char, x :: Bool } if you prefer, but that's
susceptible to typos of the x, y, z ::
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:04:02 +, Ian Lynagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a good reason why I can't say
data Bar = Bar { _ :: Int, _ :: Char, x :: Bool }
Since you only want one field out of many, what is the difficulty in
simply defining the projection/updating functions
Martin Sjögren wrote:
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:04:02 +, Ian Lynagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Is there a good reason why I can't say
data Bar = Bar { _ :: Int, _ :: Char, x :: Bool }
?
I agree that it would be useful, but wouldn't
data Bar = Bar Int Char { x :: Bool }
make more
George Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in article [EMAIL PROTECTED] in
gmane.comp.lang.haskell.general:
Ken Shan's paper, the above and the following messages
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell/2004-September/014515.html
argue that Haskell already has the full power of Standard
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 04:07:48PM +, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:04:02 +, Ian Lynagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a good reason why I can't say
data Bar = Bar { _ :: Int, _ :: Char, x :: Bool }
In case it wasn't clear, there is an x :: Bool in lots
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, John Goerzen wrote:
Here are some examples:
vsprintf Hello
Hello
vsprintf Hello, %s\n John
Hello, John\n
vsprintf %s, your age is %d\n John (10::Integer)
John, your age is 10\n
sprintfAL %(name)s, your age is %(age)d\n
[(name, v John),
(age, v
Henning Thielemann writes:
Variable length argument lists are really a mess. Why are
people so keen on them?
One advantage is that you need to type fewer characters.
It's, well, not _that_ important, I'll readily admit. :-)
But
vsnprintf i = %d;\tj = %s 12 test
is more compact than any
On 16 Nov 2004, Peter Simons wrote:
Henning Thielemann writes:
Variable length argument lists are really a mess. Why are
people so keen on them?
One advantage is that you need to type fewer characters.
I know memory is expensive, that's why only the last two digits of year
numbers
At the risk of getting off topic... the reason 'C' has printf is because
it is not
polymorphic. Printf is a hack to allow different types to be printed
out, such that
they did not need printInt, printFloat etc. Remember C is typesafe, so
the only
way they could do this was to pass the first
Keean Schupke wrote:
Remember C is typesafe
In which parallel universe?
--
Andreas Rossberg, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Let's get rid of those possible thingies! -- TB
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2004-11-16 at 11:42+0100 Peter Simons wrote:
Henning Thielemann writes:
One advantage is that you need to type fewer characters.
I know memory is expensive, that's why only the last two
digits of year numbers are stored. :-]
I understand what you're getting at -- and I find it
Andreas Rossberg wrote:
Keean Schupke wrote:
Remember C is typesafe
In which parallel universe?
I of course meant strongly-typed, you cannot pass a pointer to an int
where a pointer
to a float is required ... modern C compilers require you to explicitly
cast. Where
it fell down was all that
Actually it can be statically checked, as the string is a constant, we can
lift it to a type (at the moment we would have to use template haskell - but
there is no reason the compiler cannot be a little more aggresive in
applying
functions to constants at compile time, in which case we can use
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 12:21:41PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
The function MissingH.Printf.sprintf is probably the better choice, but
one could even replace [Value] by [String]. The conversion from any type
to String can be easily done using 'show' by the caller. Though it gives
the
Keean Schupke wrote:
At the risk of getting off topic... the reason 'C' has printf is because
it is not polymorphic. Printf is a hack to allow different types to be
printed out, such that they did not need printInt, printFloat etc.
Many language have printf-like functions despite not satisfying
Jon Fairbairn writes:
vsprintf %d, your age is %s\n John (10::Integer)
is type incorrect, but won't be reported at compile time.
Hmmm. Right. You'd need Template Haskell for that.
I see.
Peter
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
Keean Schupke wrote:
At the risk of getting off topic... the reason 'C' has printf is because
it is not polymorphic. Printf is a hack to allow different types to be
printed out, such that they did not need printInt, printFloat etc.
Many language have printf-like
Keean Schupke wrote:
I of course meant strongly-typed, you cannot pass a pointer to an int
where a pointer
to a float is required ... modern C compilers require you to explicitly
cast.
According to the C standard,
void f(float *p) { *p + 1.0; }
void g(void *p) { f(p); }
void h(int n) {
Of course you can do intertationalisation with show... There is a
paper on using type classes to define implicit confugurations,
perhasps someone can provide the reference?
This can be used to nicely redefine show... Ill see if I cant
dig out an example.
Keean.
On 2004 November 16 Tuesday 06:42, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
There is a probleme with ShowS though: it is not internationalizable at
all. Strings like printf's or with any kind of variable substitution is
required for proper internationalization / localization.
Printf is not adequate for
On 2004-11-16, Henning Thielemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 16 Nov 2004, Peter Simons wrote:
Yes and no. It can't be checked statically if the number of placeholders
matches the number of arguments. It can't be checked statically if the
types of placeholders match the types of arguments. It
On 2004-11-16, Peter Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know memory is expensive, that's why only the last two
digits of year numbers are stored. :-]
I understand what you're getting at -- and I find it
annoying, too, when people sacrifice robustness for comfort.
In this particular case,
On 2004-11-16, Jon Fairbairn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2004-11-16 at 11:42+0100 Peter Simons wrote:
I'm not sure, though, whether this is the case here, because
vsnprintf in Haskell still is type-safe.
Not statically, though, surely?
vsprintf %d, your age is %s\n John (10::Integer)
is
On 2004 November 16 Tuesday 06:42, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
There is a probleme with ShowS though: it is not internationalizable at
all. Strings like printf's or with any kind of variable substitution is
required for proper internationalization / localization.
Printf is not adequate for
32 matches
Mail list logo
