Daniel McAllansmith wrote:
When I try to add MonadError into the types I eventually hit the
requirement for allow-undecidable-instances. Is there some way I can
I avoid having to use this extension?
class (Num i, Bounded i, Monad m, MonadError String m)
= MonadSource i m | m - i
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
If you want your blog listed, email me. I will not add people without
their consent. Just tell me your RSS/Atom feed URI (try to pick one
that will not contain non-English posts; but there is no need to
restrict to just Haskell-related posts - half of the beauty
Hello haskellers,
I have been following this list's debates for a while
and I am very enthusiastic about functional programming in general and
haskell in particular. I am on the verge of starting a new sofware development
project for a
customer and I wonder whether or not Haskell would be the
Arnaud Bailly wrote:
I am on the verge of starting a new sofware development project for a
customer and I wonder whether or not Haskell would be the right tool
to do the job.
One snag is that I doubt you could ring up an agency and ask for half a
dozen Haskell programmers. You could
Hello Arnaud,
Tuesday, March 28, 2006, 3:58:53 PM, you wrote:
The project is a Point-of-sale distributed management system with the
following (non-exhaustive) list of features :
- rich GUI clients (on windows platform) to allow optimizing users input
speed. There will
about 50-60
Pete Chown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Arnaud Bailly wrote:
I am on the verge of starting a new sofware development project for a
customer and I wonder whether or not Haskell would be the right tool
to do the job.
One snag is that I doubt you could ring up an agency and ask for half
a dozen
instead of coding them. I am thinking about an approach
based on a sort of DSL design with Haskell then code/bytecode
generation to Java/whatever platform.
Yhc can generate a portable bytecode, and it can also generate .NET
bytecode (IL), and there was a project underway to generate Java (JVM)
On Mar 28, 2006, at 1:02 AM, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 03:10:18PM -0800, Greg Fitzgerald wrote:
hold a part of the data in memory while you show the first one,
Here would be a better example then.
f lst = show (sum (filter ( 1) lst), sum (filter ( 2) lst))
It
...Anyway, I can't help but think that there might be a happy mediumbetween eager and lazy evaluation.
What I'd love to see is the compiler continue to be call-by-need, but be smart enough to recognize when multiple expressions will all eventually need to be evaluated. A simple example: show (a +
On Tuesday 28 March 2006 07:29, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
MonadError is not up to this task as far as I can tell.
Why not? All that needs to be done is write the missing instances, eg
instance MonadError () Maybe where
throwError x = Nothing
Nothing `catchError` f =
On 3/24/06, Henning Thielemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A new type, say Cardinal as in Modula, would document for the user of a
function that only non-negative numbers are allowed and the function
writer can be sure, that only non-negative numbers are passed.
...
newtype Cardinal =
On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 08:57:00AM +1200, Daniel McAllansmith wrote:
On Tuesday 28 March 2006 07:29, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
MonadError is not up to this task as far as I can tell.
Why not? All that needs to be done is write the missing instances, eg
instance MonadError () Maybe
On Wednesday 29 March 2006 09:49, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
If you want to write a MonadError operation that can be used with Maybe
or Either, it would look like
f :: (MonadError e m, Error e) = Bool - m Int
f b = if b
then return 42
else throwError (strMsg The boolean
On 3/27/06, lee marks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So this is legal:
type Fix s a = s a (Fix s a)
fold :: Functor (s a) = (s a b - b) - Fix s a - b
fold f = f . fmap (fold f)
but this is not:
fold f = f . fmap (fold f)
data Fix s a = Fix {runFix :: s a (Fix s a)}
fold :: Functor (s
On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 12:27:43PM -0800, Greg Fitzgerald wrote:
...Anyway, I can't help but think that there might be a happy medium
between eager and lazy evaluation.
What I'd love to see is the compiler continue to be call-by-need, but be
smart enough to recognize when multiple
15 matches
Mail list logo
