shut
down the old server on Jan 31, 2011. Hopefully this will give everyone
adequate time to move their files.
Oh, for goodness' sake. Put a tarball somewhere and I'll put up a
mirror for the laggards. It can stay there for years for all I care.
--
Taral tar...@gmail.com
Please let me know
, and you're the only one complaining like this. Take a backup
of the site with wget and fix it when you have time.
--
Taral tar...@gmail.com
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell mailing list
, there's no attempt to prove that:
forall (P Q : forall a, a - a), P = Q.
which is what parametricity means to me.
--
Taral tar...@gmail.com
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Ryan Ingram ryani.s...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Taral tar...@gmail.com wrote:
Will this do?
(=) :: (NFData sa, NFData b) = LI sa - (sa - LI b) - LI b
No, the problem is that = on monads has no constraints, it must have the
type
LI
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Nicolas Pouillard
nicolas.pouill...@gmail.com wrote:
The type I would need for bind is this one:
(=) :: NFData sa = LI sa - (sa - LI b) - LI b
Will this do?
(=) :: (NFData sa, NFData b) = LI sa - (sa - LI b) - LI b
--
Taral tar...@gmail.com
Please let me
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Don Stewart d...@galois.com wrote:
Util/Gen.hs:6:7:
Could not find module `Control.Monad.Identity':
it was found in multiple packages: transformers-0.1.1.0 mtl-1.1.0.2
make[1]: *** [jhc] Error 1
ghc-pkg hide transformers-0.1.1.0
--
Taral tar
On 3/12/08, Neil Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, I don't believe this expression is type safe in Haskell.
Using higher-order polymorphism:
f (x :: forall a. a - a) = x x
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
On 2/27/08, Chad Scherrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is {-# LANGUAGE MagicHash #-} documented somewhere? I've seen it referenced a
few times now, but I can't find any details about it.
No. http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/1297
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's
)
(nth (- n 1) (tail xs (t nil)))
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
evaluation order, amongst other
things. Hm... thank you very much!
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 1:05 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
reset ((\x - x + x) (shift f f))
This one doesn't typecheck, since you can't unify the types (a - r) and r.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
My understanding of these things is limited, but what would stop me,
theoretically speaking, of making a version of ghc with these
primitives added:
type Prompt r
reset :: (Prompt r - r) - r
shift :: Prompt r - ((a - _) - r) - a
(Where _ is either r or forall b. b)
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED
On 2/22/08, Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
reset :: (Prompt r - r) - r
shift :: Prompt r - ((a - _) - r) - a
The point of the question is about shift/reset with *these types*. I
know there are implementations with other types.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any
created using these primitives?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On 2/22/08, Derek Elkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
shift and reset
I was under the impression that reset was a pure function. What side
effects does it have?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
On 2/22/08, Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
shift :: Prompt r - ((a - _) - r) - a
(Where _ is either r or forall b. b)
It occurs to me that _ has to be r, otherwise the subcontinuation can escape.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you
assertions that t is an instance of B (B t), it does
*not* provide assertions that t is not an instance of B. This is
because an instance of B can be declared by other modules at a later
point (e.g. by someone who imports your module).
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any
. What's to prevent it doing that?
Look at the translation:
newIVar = (\x - let y = readIVar x in writeIVar x 3 print y)
y can't be floated out because it depends on x.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
properties. You'd have to clone the server
_ clause into the x clause.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org
into a significantly more useful programming language.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
On 7/12/07, Doug McIlroy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~doug/powser.html
Very nice. I would only recommend that you include:
scale k f = map (k*) f
and have (*) use it. Thanks for your contribution!
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further
reading about the interesting things everyone else is up to.
Hear, hear. Thank you very much Andres!
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http
On 5/24/07, Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Taral wrote:
The other syntaxes proposed don't strike me as sufficiently rigorous.
Me neither. It's always been a great source of puzzlement to me why this
very simple and IMO conservative proposal should be so controversial.
Unless someone can
On 5/24/07, Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Taral wrote:
The other syntaxes proposed don't strike me as sufficiently rigorous.
Me neither. It's always been a great source of puzzlement to me why this
very simple and IMO conservative proposal should be so controversial.
Unless someone can
rigorous.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
, it complains that I don't have a gcc on my
machine...
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
applications for Mac, you need
to know the OS. And the OS is a UNIX.
On 5/20/07, Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You need to install Xcode (from your Mac OS disk) before you can use ghc.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
as unfriendly to Fortran programmers.
[breaking cc list]
Would this kind of thing be eligible for Haskell'? I never had a
problem with _1 in APL-type languages... and I think it's best to be
very clear about intent.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I
consuming.
I personally recommend to people that if sections of your code are
really performance-critical, you should consider writing them in a
lower-level lanaguage like C and using FFI for access.
P.S. I wonder if jhc could improve the output code?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything
. (These sets may continue to grow.)
Congratulations to all the students.
Darcs Con[f]lict Handling
Yay!
Rewrite the typechecker for YHC and nhc98
Yay again!
Update the Hat tracer
YAY!
Ok done now. :D
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
express it right?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
On 3/13/07, Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And it doesn't work. I know what I want it to do, how do I express it right?
This is closer, but still doesn't work:
class (Monad i, Monad o) = MonadTrans' i o where
lift' :: i a - o a
instance Monad m = MonadTrans' m m where
lift' = id
On 3/13/07, Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is closer, but still doesn't work:
And this works, and I don't know why:
class MonadTrans' i o where
lift' :: (Monad i, Monad o) = i a - o a
instance Monad m = MonadTrans' m m where
lift' = id
instance (MonadTrans t, Monad b, MonadTrans
have verified that the generator function works.
But I haven't found any confirmation by googling. Has anyone got
wind of this?
Thanks,
Dave Feustel
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
--
Taral
On 3/1/07, Dave Tapley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My question asks why this is the case, when laziness should ensure only the
first 10 cases need to be computed.
Basically, because the IO monad is strict, not lazy. If you want
laziness, don't use the IO monad.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You
, for example.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
. The
layout rule never generates empty braces.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
, this shouldn't matter, however on some platforms an open
file handle can prevent deletion of the file.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http
- IO.hGetContents handle
let len = length contents
seq len $ IO.hClose handle
return $ XP.xmlParse fn contents
This works, because to get the head of len (an integer) you need the
whole of contents.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything
On 12/19/06, mm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i'd like to inform you about the first announced version of CalDims.
Its website is in the haskellwiki:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/CalDims
Neat! It's like units, but in Haskell.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything
.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On 12/13/06, Alfonso Acosta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
deactivate :: Maybe(hd - IO ()),
According to the spec, NULL here means no-op. So instead of using
Maybe, just set deactivate = \_ - return () if you see NULL.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything
On 12/13/06, Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Second, you don't want the consumer to pick the hd type. If you're
willing to accept extensions (I think you are), make it existential:
data Descriptor = forall hd. Descriptor { ... }
This will ensure that you can't pass the handles from one plugin
On 12/13/06, Alfonso Acosta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see what you mean here. I'm not using ForeignPtrs at all.
... you're *writing* a plugin, not using one. Oh. Um... let me think
about that one.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
...
There should be a README or INSTALL file in the original tarball that
explains how to do that. I suspect it is a flag you have to pass to
runhaskell Setup.lhs configure.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
On 12/12/06, Alfonso Acosta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it would be great to be able to use unsafeCoerce.
It would be great -- but Typeable is the only way to get *safe*
typecasts of this type. Otherwise, you may as well run without a
typechecker.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove
On 12/11/06, Nia Rium [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In my humble opinion, in this context, GUI doesn't mean a library to
implement a GUI application. It rather means an interpreter/compiler that
provides graphical interface.
Windows users can use Visual Haskell...
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You
On 12/11/06, Philippa Cowderoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only those who already have Visual Studio, no?
Yes, that is an unfortunate limitation.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe
commands are:
runhaskell Setup.lhs configure
runhaskell Setup.lhs build
runhaskell Setup.lhs install
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http
that you're casting Dynamic back to the original type.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
unsafeCoerce a dangerous operation?
Sure it is. The type you gave (MyType Int Char - MyType a b) can
easily crash your program.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe
On 12/8/06, Nicolas Frisby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did see that one on the wiki; but it doesn't seem to support the
open intervals (i.e. (-inf, 3)) and I'd really like those.
Oh, it does. See BoundaryAboveAll and BoundaryBelowAll.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything
. If you need to *wait* for an asynchronous exception, then
you shouldn't be using them at all.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org
)? A possible complication is that I'm hoping to
include open intervals such as (GreaterEqThan 3).
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http
On 12/4/06, Joachim Breitner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
\g - map (\n a - g a !! n) [1..]
I think that's about as good as it gets.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing
on that code instead.
WASH has one, and I uploaded mine to http://www.taral.net/mime.tar.gz
for people to look at and use.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
On 12/2/06, Huazhi (Hank) Gong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
myrand :: Int
myrand = randomRIO(1::Int, 100)
rf=[(myrand, myrand) | a - [1..50]]
do
let myrand = randomRIO (1 :: Int, 100)
rf - replicateM 50 (liftM2 (,) myrand myrand)
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything
know where to look or what to search for.
I suggest you check the Functional Graph Library (FGL). It's shipped
as part of GHC.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell
.
If you're trying to do random access on a list, you should rethink why
you're using a list.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http
throw in my haskell MIME parser if you want
it. It's not the same as the one that most people use -- but I like it
better. :)
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe
the $ and you'll be fine.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
(1) random access for the writers to put their results in
efficiently. And newArray_ should be faster than N copies of
newEmptyMVar. It is true that I have one congestion point (the
semaphone) instead of N (the mvars).
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence
? It's possible
that the array approach wins when you try to process 100,000 elements.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman
? The IO monad is strict, so the computations should be
done in parallel...
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
indentation does
nothing to improve readability, and is a common frustration. The point
of all sugar is to reduce frustration, so I am strongly in favor of
the new syntax.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
sequence_ $ zipWith proc [0..] xs
waitQSemN count l
elems $ unsafeFreeze arr
STM might work better than a QSemN...
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http
On 10/21/06, Audrey Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
let proc n x = do
Hmm, am I missing something here, but how does forkIO (and data
parallelism) fit in into that scheme?
I R DUM.
let proc n x = forkIO $ do
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence
be implemented requirement for major features. However, it
seems that Haskell' is a good way to get people thinking about future
improvements, and I'd hate to stifle that.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
languages out there with no web forum.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
On 9/20/06, Niklas Broberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is much easier to keep conversations in context in a forum, and to
search for old conversations. It's all there, all the time.
Eh, I don't have this problem. I use gmail.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's
instances for it.
Can you define instance Cxt a = Read (Box a)? If not, then you need
typecase and Haskell does not really support that.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
it? In my mind, the current mode is a
functional one:
Eq :: Eq t = Expr t - Expr t - Expr Bool
And this is perfectly readable. The arrow means that the argument is
an implicit propositional one, but it's still an argument.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's
on a variable in scope. Type signatures have implicit variables.
Also, there's no way for the guard to fall through or anything like
that. It's just not similar enough for me.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
...
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
On 9/8/06, Bill Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We await the response with bated breath.
Don't hold your breath.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http
of the underlying collection (hence
the numerous fold* functions), map is not.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman
Functor comes into scope via import.
The current proposal to require people to write instance Functor
isn't so pretty as the hierarchy becomes more fine-grained:
instance Monad [] where
instance Functor
instance PointedFunctor
instance Applicative
...
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You
:
module A contains instance Monad []
module B contains instance Functor []
module C imports A and B.
Do we complain about a duplicate instance declarations? If not, does
the use of fmap in A use the default definition, or the one from B?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything
:: IODynamicRef a - a - IO b - IO b
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
On 7/19/06, Stefan Karrmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunatly, darcs does
not provide a method to extract patches as far as I know. (Hints are
welcomed.)
darcs diff and darcs annotate.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
/export trick described by Anatoly or
you can just construct the FunPtr in main or an unsafePerformIO CAF.
(We need a constructor syntax for top-level objects requiring IO!)
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
(cb, ds) - deRefStablePtr sp
freeStablePtr sp
freeHaskellFunPtr cb
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
newTVarIO, but I'm not sure about TMVars.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
On 7/12/06, Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because atomically doesn't like unsafePerformIO.
In more detail: atomically is not re-entrant. You could try something like:
main = a `seq` do ...
to make sure that you don't re-enter the STM subsystem and crash.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You
or interpreter.
Perhaps this could be forwarded onto the GHC and other compiler people
for consideration as an extension?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
of generics, subclassing,
and virtual dispatch. However, ...
Am I the only one whose first instinct upon reading this is EW!?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
and started reading it -- it is an
impressive work with some *very* interesting projects I had no idea
were out there! Thank you!
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell
On 5/28/06, Dominic Steinitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this defined in some library? Thanks, Dominic.
Don't think so. I use:
\a b - f (g a b)
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell
to have been overlooked is that
different people will execute these commands differently:
./configure --prefix=/opt/freeware --sysconfdir=/etc --disable-nls
make
make install DESTDIR=/home/taral/staging
Many people will run make install as root but the main compile as
non-root. You can't blindly
(simplify :: HsExp - HsExp))
. everywhere (mkT (simplify :: HsPat - HsPat))
. everywhere (mkT (simplify :: HsRhs - HsRhs))
Of course, that's not any simpler.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
On 5/20/06, Bas van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
simplifyExp (HsLeftSection e op)= HsApp (opToExp op) e
simplifyExp (HsRightSection op e) = HsApp (opToExp op) e
By the way, I think this looks wrong. One of these needs to create a
lambda expression.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED
on what level of
*minimum* termination support Haskell' will insist upon. The CHR paper
(with the confluence improvements by Claus) is currently the most
promising option, and has an implementation (another important
consideration) in GHC.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything
On 4/15/06, John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the downside, this means that I couldn't just say:
take 5 mylist
I'd instead have to write:
take (5::Int) mylist
Wouldn't defaulting do this?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
... returnsquickly?
Hear, hear:
fast - takes very little time to execute
pure - side-effect free
nocallback - does not call back into Haskell
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-prime mailing
was thinking that it might be more useful to express it programatically:
if preemptive then fork _|_ return () = ()
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
is this necessary?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
single ones. Can we please have something like:
threadWait :: Timeout - [Handle] - IO ?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://haskell.org
concurrent -- the hard one
{- nothing -}
Can I suggest sef in this? Most cases of unsafe are actually
claims that the call is side-effect free.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell
/orElse?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
refers to the idea that somehow
such strictness annotations are (a) required at the type level and (b)
required at all to enable such optimization. I believe the
optimization happens without any annotation from the user, and it
should stay that way.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
