On 18/06/2011 11:20, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
As one of the few people who has habitually used Haskell'98 wherever
possible, I favour plan A. As I recently discovered, in ghc 7 it is
already very fragile to attempt to depend on both the base and
haskell98 packages simultaneously. In most cases
On 17/06/2011 16:42, Brandon Allbery wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:11, Jacques Carettecare...@mcmaster.ca wrote:
they chose to stick to pure Haskell 98. Plan B is actually more fragile in
that respect, in that if they forget to be really really explicit about
their code being pure Haskell
From: Bas van Dijk v.dijk@gmail.com
On 17 June 2011 16:47, Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com wrote:
So: ? ?Under Plan A, some Hackage packages will become un-compilable,
? ? ? and will require source code changes to fix them. ?I do not have
? ? ? ?any idea how many Hackage
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:54:30AM +0100, John Lato wrote:
From: Bas van Dijk v.dijk@gmail.com
On 17 June 2011 16:47, Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com wrote:
So: ? ?Under Plan A, some Hackage packages will become un-compilable,
? ? ? and will require source code changes
On 20 June 2011 11:54, John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it easy to check, out of those 344, how many would build if the
dependency on haskell98 were removed?
You could write a script that will download them all, remove the
haskell98 dep. and cabal build the package.
(Bas, your link
Simon Peyton-Jones writes:
(Plan A) Add a module 'Prelude' to package 'haskell98'.
Now you can compile a pure H98 program thus:
ghc -c Main.hs -hide-all-packages -package haskell98
(Cabal puts the -hide-all-packages in for you.) And this will
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 12:43:37PM +0100, Paterson, Ross wrote:
Simon Peyton-Jones writes:
(Plan A) Add a module 'Prelude' to package 'haskell98'.
Now you can compile a pure H98 program thus:
ghc -c Main.hs -hide-all-packages -package haskell98
As one of the few people who has habitually used Haskell'98 wherever possible,
I favour plan A. As I recently discovered, in ghc 7 it is already very fragile
to attempt to depend on both the base and haskell98 packages simultaneously.
In most cases it simply doesn't work. Removing those few
: the only
libraries affected are those which mix H98 and more modern modules. This
means that the authors are already beyond Haskell 98, and realize that there
is real value to go beyond that. So they should be reasonably amenable to
continue to move forward.
On the other hand, those who were
On 17 June 2011 16:47, Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com wrote:
So: Under Plan A, some Hackage packages will become un-compilable,
and will require source code changes to fix them. I do not have
any idea how many Hackage packages would fail in this way.
Of the 372
Friends, this is to ask your opinion about a possible change in GHC 7.2. The
current implementation in GHC 7.2 is Plan A below. Plan A is a bit easier for
us, but I think it may be a bit draconian, and therefore propose Plan B as an
alternative. Opinions?
Simon
balance: the only
libraries affected are those which mix H98 and more modern modules.
This means that the authors are already beyond Haskell 98, and realize
that there is real value to go beyond that. So they should be
reasonably amenable to continue to move forward.
On the other hand, those who
On Friday 17 June 2011, 17:11:39, Jacques Carette wrote:
I favour Plan A.
+1
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:11, Jacques Carette care...@mcmaster.ca wrote:
they chose to stick to pure Haskell 98. Plan B is actually more fragile in
that respect, in that if they forget to be really really explicit about
their code being pure Haskell 98, the resulting compilation errors do
On 6/17/11, Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Friday 17 June 2011, 17:11:39, Jacques Carette wrote:
I favour Plan A.
+1
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
#5012: haskell 98 program does not typecheck when compiled with -XTypeFamilies
-+--
Reporter: jcpetruzza| Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
#5012: haskell 98 program does not typecheck when compiled with -XTypeFamilies
---+
Reporter: jcpetruzza | Owner:
Type: bug| Status
#5012: haskell 98 program does not typecheck when compiled with -XTypeFamilies
+---
Reporter: jcpetruzza | Owner:
Type: bug| Status: closed
#5012: haskell 98 program does not typecheck when compiled with -XTypeFamilies
+---
Reporter: jcpetruzza | Owner:
Type: bug| Status: closed
in Haskell 98, i.e. with single parameter type classes and
non-overlapping instances. It seems to work quite well, the only drawback
is that you have to define n^2 instances for n exceptions. This is much
inspired by:
http://users.dsic.upv.es/~jiborra/papers/explicitexceptions.pdf
Consider two
#4399: Infinite loop when compiling Haskell '98 code
-+--
Reporter: sjoerd_visscher | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: closed
Priority: normal
#4399: Infinite loop when compiling Haskell '98 code
-+--
Reporter: sjoerd_visscher | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: closed
Priority: normal
#4399: Infinite loop when compiling Haskell '98 code
-+--
Reporter: sjoerd_visscher | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: closed
Priority: normal
#4399: Infinite loop when compiling Haskell '98 code
-+--
Reporter: sjoerd_visscher | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: normal
#4399: Infinite loop when compiling Haskell '98 code
+---
Reporter: sjoerd_visscher | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: closed
Priority: normal
#3766: Parsing of lambdas is not consistent with Haskell'98 report.
--+-
Reporter: lilac |Owner:
Type: bug| Status: new
#3766: Parsing of lambdas is not consistent with Haskell'98 report.
-+--
Reporter: lilac | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
#3766: Parsing of lambdas is not consistent with Haskell'98 report.
--+-
Reporter: lilac | Owner:
Type: bug| Status: new
#3766: Parsing of lambdas is not consistent with Haskell'98 report.
--+-
Reporter: lilac | Owner:
Type: bug| Status: new
#3766: Parsing of lambdas is not consistent with Haskell'98 report.
--+-
Reporter: lilac | Owner:
Type: bug| Status: new
Today, as I was reading through The Haskell 98 Report (see
http://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/), I came across a minor typo, but
it seems that the only way to fix such typos is to report them on one
of the Haskell mailing lists; viz.:
The original committees ceased to exist when the original
On 6 Apr 2009, at 08:56, Benjamin L.Russell wrote:
Today, as I was reading through The Haskell 98 Report (see
http://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/), I came across a minor typo, but
it seems that the only way to fix such typos is to report them on one
of the Haskell mailing lists;
Thanks
#3014: Any type being derived in Haskell 98 module
+---
Reporter: fasta|Owner:
Type: bug | Status: closed
Priority: normal
#2746: Documentation for Haskell 98 modules is empty
-+--
Reporter: simonmar |Owner:
Type: bug | Status: closed
Priority: high
#3014: Any type being derived in Haskell 98 module
-+--
Reporter: fasta | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: normal
#3014: Any type being derived in Haskell 98 module
-+--
Reporter: fasta| Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: normal
Hi,
Am Donnerstag, den 08.01.2009, 22:22 +0100 schrieb Henning Thielemann:
On 8 Jan 2009, at 23:59, Henning Thielemann wrote:
From Report:
A nice. I jumped into 4.3 and found
§ § R 32 ©
¦ 6
© ¦ 32 ¢ R
#2746: Documentation for Haskell 98 modules is empty
-+--
Reporter: simonmar |Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: high
GHC accepts a class declaration like
class Monad (m Maybe) = C m where
...
without having any language extension switched on. But it isn't Haskell
98, is it? Hugs 2005 also accepts this.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On 8 Jan 2009, at 23:59, Henning Thielemann wrote:
GHC accepts a class declaration like
class Monad (m Maybe) = C m where
...
without having any language extension switched on. But it isn't
Haskell 98, is it?
It is.
From Report:
A class assertion has form
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Miguel Mitrofanov wrote:
On 8 Jan 2009, at 23:59, Henning Thielemann wrote:
GHC accepts a class declaration like
class Monad (m Maybe) = C m where
...
without having any language extension switched on. But it isn't Haskell 98,
is it?
It is.
From Report
Haskell
98, is it?
It is.
From Report:
A class assertion has form qtycls tyvar, and indicates the membership of
the type tyvar in the class qtycls. A class identifier begins with an
uppercase letter. A context consists of zero or more class assertions, and
has
On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 10:27:59PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
A nice. I jumped into 4.3 and found
scontext - simpleclass
| (simpleclass_1, ..., simpleclass_n)
simpleclass - qtycls tyvar
So it must be 'atype' instead of 'tyvar'? Haskell 98 is really mighty.
Oh. Don't I look
'? Haskell 98 is really
mighty.
Oh. Don't I look silly? You were absolutely right, it's not
Haskell 98.
Me too. I've looked at the type declaration syntax instead of instance
declaration one.
Actually Hugs does reject it without flags. Maybe you have a -98
stored
somewhere
So it must be 'atype' instead of 'tyvar'? Haskell 98 is really mighty.
Oh. Don't I look silly? You were absolutely right, it's not Haskell 98.
Me too. I've looked at the type declaration syntax instead of instance
declaration one.
Maybe the report is not complete? I mean, the current
version rejects it, and
I downloaded and built the Mar2005 version just to check, and it also
rejected it, saying
Illegal Haskell 98 class constraint in class declaration
I think the GHC behaviour is connected with GHC's deferred context
reduction, which also does not conform to Haskell 98
by the Hugs behaviour. The current version rejects it, and
I downloaded and built the Mar2005 version just to check, and it also
rejected it, saying
Illegal Haskell 98 class constraint in class declaration
You are right. I don't know, what I made different before. Btw. 2005
#2746: Documentation for Haskell 98 modules is empty
-+--
Reporter: simonmar |Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: high
#2746: Documentation for Haskell 98 modules is empty
-+--
Reporter: simonmar |Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: high
#2746: Documentation for Haskell 98 modules is empty
-+--
Reporter: simonmar |Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: high
#2746: Documentation for Haskell 98 modules is empty
-+--
Reporter: simonmar |Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: high
#2746: Documentation for Haskell 98 modules is empty
-+--
Reporter: simonmar | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: high
#2735: ghc panic with Haskell 98 program (applyTypeToArgs?)
--+-
Reporter: int-e | Owner: simonpj
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: normal
#2735: ghc panic with Haskell 98 program (applyTypeToArgs?)
--+-
Reporter: int-e | Owner: simonpj
Type: bug | Status: closed
Priority: normal
#2735: ghc panic with Haskell 98 program (applyTypeToArgs?)
-+--
Reporter: int-e | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: normal
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, Thomas Hartman wrote:
On a related note... is there some easy way to be sure that a program I am
compiling uses only haskell 98? (Because any pure haskell 98 should always
compile on yhc... right?)
You can for instance
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, Thomas Hartman wrote:
On a related note... is there some easy way to be sure that a program I am
compiling uses only haskell 98? (Because any pure haskell 98 should always
compile on yhc... right?)
You can for instance use 'haskell98' as dependent package instead of
'base
... I hit Chapter 3 and started reading about expressions.
*If you are able to answer any of these questions, please send me an
email. I am very lost and confused in this section, so even one
answered question may help greatly.*
I actually decided to sit down and figure out the Haskell 98
answered question
may help greatly.*
I actually decided to sit down and figure out the Haskell 98 Report today.
Everything was going well until I began Chapter 3. Here's the section that
has me baffled:
In the syntax that follows, there are some families of nonterminals
indexed
On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 04:50:02AM -0700, Ian Duncan wrote:
So here's my list of questions so far:
1. What are nonterminals?
2. What are productions and substitutions?
[snip]
Sounds to me like you want a book on language design, grammars,
parsing, etc. :-)
There are many good ones out
Hi,
I was improving my Haskell knowledge lately and I created a small dhtml application which allows browsing of
Haskell 98 grammar. I contains both forward and backward hyperlinks. By backward hyperlink I mean that you can
click on an a production head and you get a popup list box where you
allows browsing of
Haskell 98 grammar. I contains both forward and backward hyperlinks. By
backward hyperlink I mean that you can
click on an a production head and you get a popup list box where you can
navigate to any production using the
nonterminal. If you like it please save and use your
application which allows browsing of
Haskell 98 grammar. I contains both forward and backward hyperlinks. By
backward hyperlink I mean that you can
click on an a production head and you get a popup list box where you can
navigate to any production using the
nonterminal. If you like
On 8/16/07, Neil Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In addition, perhaps this should be relocated to haskell.org, if your
server is not suitable for a large volume of users. I think it should
also be integrated somewhere (perhaps a link from the HTML report, and
certainly on the wiki)
Agreed,
with GHC (although haskell-cafe can also be used for those)
Thanks
Neil
On 8/16/07, Peter Hercek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I was improving my Haskell knowledge lately and I created a small dhtml
application which allows browsing of
Haskell 98 grammar. I contains both forward and backward
Hello,
I don't know if there are French-speaking people reading this
mailing-list, but we at haskell-fr have some great news today !
We didn't find any French translation of the Gentle Introduction to
Haskell (version 98), thus we decide to write it.
Today, I would like to announce that we
Diversity is generated by mutations.
This is hardly a revelation.
My point was that you need two competing components in relative balance to
grow something meaningful.
Cancer growth is based solely on mutation!
Also I was not theological. It is the advice to multiply Prelude and use
time to
| Why, then, are we so paranoid about introducing breaking changes in
| the development branch of haskell? Why are we stuck without the class
| system extension proposal? Why is Num so still so horribly mangled?
| Why can I not 'map' over a Set? Why must I use lists of characters if
| I desire
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 09:20:59 +0100
Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| [Conjecture 1 (2007). Haskell Mathematical Prelude and
Mathematicians] If | Haskell had a mathematically sound prelude then
more mathematicians would | use Haskell.
A mathematically sound Prelude would be
Haskell is rather a Darwinian sort of place.
With whole respect. You need two components for evolution to work: the
survival of the fitness and Generator Of Diversity (GOD).
Now, Haskell attracts originality and easily accommodates changes but nobody
burns tires in testing anything so that
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Andrzej Jaworski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: 26.03.07 15:00:47
An: Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
Betreff: Re: [Haskell-cafe] What ever happened to Haskell 98 as a
stablebranch?
Haskell is rather a Darwinian sort
-
| From: Andrzej Jaworski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: 26 March 2007 14:02
| To: Simon Peyton-Jones
| Cc: Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] What ever happened to Haskell 98 as a
stablebranch?
|
| Haskell is rather a Darwinian sort of place.
|
| With whole respect. You need
Daniel Fischer has cared to inform me that:
Diversity is generated by mutations.
With due respect, but this is hardly a revelation.
My point was that you need two competing components in relative balance to
grow something meaningful.
Cancer growth is based solely on mutation!
Also I was not
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Andrzej Jaworski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: 26.03.07 18:34:00
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: [Haskell-cafe] What ever happened to Haskell 98 as a
stablebranch?
Hi,
I apologize for mistakenly resending my answer to two lists.
Well, I can
Accidentally sent to haskell@haskell.org instead of the cafe:
Diversity is generated by mutations.
This is hardly a revelation.
It was, looong ago.
My point was that you need two competing components in relative balance to
grow something meaningful.
And I'd think the Haskell community
If you answer because H98 is obsolete, then file this away as a
must-read after H' is released
Ideas always originate in a single mind. Good ideas are only footnotes to
the best idea that determine them.
Now: a team of people with different views on the same thing can achieve
their best
Upon more reflection...
From the Preface to the Haskell 98 Language and Libraries Report:
Haskell 98 was conceived as a relatively minor tidy-up of Haskell
1.4, making some simplifications, and removing some pitfalls for the
unwary. It is intended to be a stable language in sense
#1171: GHC generates incorrect code with -O for Haskell 98 program
--+-
Reporter: neil | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: closed
Priority: normal| Milestone: 6.6.1
#1171: GHC generates incorrect code with -O for Haskell 98 program
--+-
Reporter: neil | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: reopened
Priority: low | Milestone
#1171: GHC generates incorrect code with -O for Haskell 98 program
--+-
Reporter: neil | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: normal| Milestone: 6.6.1
#1171: GHC generates incorrect code with -O for Haskell 98 program
-+--
Reporter: neil | Owner:
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: normal| Milestone
Hello,
referring to the Haskell 98 report as available in the Internet, I have a short
question. Section 4.1.3 (Syntax of Class Assertions and Contexts) contains the
rule:
class - qtycls tyvar
| qtycls ( tyvar atype1 ... atypen ) (n=1)
Is there a (simple) practical example of a Haskell
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 03:33:44PM +0100, Sascha B?hme wrote:
Hello,
referring to the Haskell 98 report as available in the Internet, I have a
short question. Section 4.1.3 (Syntax of Class Assertions and Contexts)
contains the rule:
class - qtycls tyvar
| qtycls ( tyvar atype1
Sascha Böhme wrote:
Hello,
referring to the Haskell 98 report as available in the Internet, I
have a short question. Section 4.1.3 (Syntax of Class Assertions
and Contexts) contains the rule:
class - qtycls tyvar
| qtycls ( tyvar atype1 ... atypen ) (n=1)
Is there a (simple
[ I'm just working through a large backlog of mails, so the original message
is a bit old... :-) ]
Am Sonntag, 20. August 2006 22:37 schrieb Henning Thielemann:
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Brian Smith wrote:
[...]
I think there should be more effort to avoid CPP completely. My
experiences with
Hi - here is an exchange that was off-list by accident:
Original Message
From: Brian Smith
To: Brian Hulley
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 5:50 AM
(Brian, I see that my last reply only went to you and so I forwarded
it to the list. Since you replied to me directly, I am responding to
On 8/20/06, Brian Hulley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Henning Thielemann wrote: On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Brian Smith wrote: I find it strange that right now almost every Haskell program directly or indirectly (through FPTOOLS) depends on CPP, yet there
is no effort to replace CPP with something better
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Brian Smith wrote:
I find it strange that right now almost every Haskell program directly or
indirectly (through FPTOOLS) depends on CPP, yet there is no effort to
replace CPP with something better or standardize its usage in Haskell.
I think there should be more effort
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Brian Smith wrote:
I find it strange that right now almost every Haskell program
directly or indirectly (through FPTOOLS) depends on CPP, yet there
is no effort to replace CPP with something better or standardize its
usage in Haskell.
I think
Hi,
I find it strange that right now almost every Haskell program
directly or indirectly (through FPTOOLS) depends on CPP, yet there is
no effort to replace CPP with something better or standardize its usage
in Haskell. According to the following document, and my own limited
experience in reading
On 8/17/06, John Meacham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 11:44:17AM -0500, Brian Smith wrote: Hi, I find it strange that right now almost every Haskell program directly or indirectly (through FPTOOLS) depends on CPP, yet there is no effort to
replace CPP with something better or
On Thursday, August 17, 2006 7:54 PM, Brian Smith wrote:
I want to have conditionals limited in their placement
to make things easier for refactoring tools. But, I
don't have any ideas about how to deal with
conditional exports without allowing preprocessor
conditionals in the export list.
brianlsmith:
Hi,
I find it strange that right now almost every Haskell
program directly or indirectly (through FPTOOLS) depends on
CPP, yet there is no effort to replace CPP with something
better or standardize its usage in Haskell. According to the
Note also cpphs,
Even though I'm largely responsible for making CPP available in a
Haskell compiler I think it's an abomination. It should be avoided.
If we standardize it, people will use it even more. I think we
should discourage it instead, then looking at exactly what it's used
for and supplying sane
On Aug 17, 2006, at 17:11 , Brian Hulley wrote:
On Thursday, August 17, 2006 7:54 PM, Brian Smith wrote:
I want to have conditionals limited in their placement
to make things easier for refactoring tools. But, I
don't have any ideas about how to deal with
conditional exports without
Hello,
On 2/19/06, Johannes Waldmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... unless you export everything, you are forced to list all exports
explicitly, so there's no way to tell it just the few things you're
hiding (though that should not be a difficult extension).
Alternative suggestion:
remove
Iavor Diatchki wrote:
remove export lists, introduce public/private modifiers
And it nicely deals with re-exporting imported entities: public
imports get reexported, private ones don't.
note though that the public/private thing in Java
also refers to the package concept, which is missing
Cale Gibbard wrote:
... unless you export everything, you are forced to list all exports
explicitly, so there's no way to tell it just the few things you're
hiding (though that should not be a difficult extension).
Alternative suggestion:
remove export lists, introduce public/private
Hello,
is there any web resource which describes the problems with Haskell 98's
record system in a compact form? The Curry people are about to adopt (parts
of) this module system and I warned them that many consider it flawed. Alas,
I'm not an expert in this area, so I cannot give much good
, is that there are no signatures (in ML
style), so it is hard to use the module system to define APIs.
-Iavor
On 2/17/06, Wolfgang Jeltsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
is there any web resource which describes the problems with Haskell 98's
record system in a compact form? The Curry people are about to adopt
1 - 100 of 405 matches
Mail list logo
