Hi Gregory,
First post. I'm a newbie, been using Haskell for about a week and
love it. Anyway, this is something I don't understand. Parsers are
monadic. I can see this if the parser is reading from an input stream
but if there's just a block of text can't you just have the parser
call
Interested in competing in the ICFP 2007 programming contest -- the
hackers contest of choice!
http://www.icfpcontest.org
There's 2000 people on this mailing list, and 350 people in #haskell, we
must be able to put together a few decent teams out of that talent
pool
To help people get
Hello Andrew,
Friday, June 29, 2007, 10:39:28 PM, you wrote:
I'm writing a whole bunch of data compression programs.
me too :) but i never used Haskell for compression itself, only for
managing archives. fast compression routines are written in C++
http://www.haskell.org/bz
--
Best
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello Andrew,
Friday, June 29, 2007, 10:39:28 PM, you wrote:
I'm writing a whole bunch of data compression programs.
me too :) but i never used Haskell for compression itself, only for
managing archives. fast compression routines are written in C++
What,
David Roundy wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 07:39:28PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Now I have a problem. It's easy enough to pass the entire data stream
through an RLE decoder and feed that to the Huffman table deserialize
function, and it will give be back the table. But I now have *no
Hi
What's Uniplate?
http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~ndm/uniplate/ may help to answer that
question. I haven't even finished understanding SYB, yet, though; I'm
still mystified by how to use Data.Generics.Twins.gzipWithQ. So, I'm
not at a stage where I can usefully contrast Uniplate with the
Big Chris writes to Gregory, who posts:
... something I don't understand. Parsers are
monadic. I can see this if the parser is reading from an input stream
but if there's just a block of text can't you just have the parser
call itself recursively feeding the unparsed text down the recursion
Hello SevenThunders,
Saturday, June 30, 2007, 7:45:57 AM, you wrote:
My own code is half Haskell and half C. My build process is rather complex
i have the same. initially C code was compiled by gcc but finally i
switched to ghc-only compilation. it's also important to use the same
gcc for
The standard, naïve approach to monadic parsing is very nice, but
inefficient. So *please read* some material based on HuttonMeijer
approach, but don't stay there, read something more modern,
since we thereby seem to have left the phase of simple answers to
simple questions;-) i'd like to raise
Dave Bayer wrote:
I've since done some experiments with Template Haskell, and I see
that Arie Peterson has suggested how you could proceed. However, are
you sure that you can't find a way to get this to work in vanilla
Haskell without extensions? Or, for that matter, are you sure there
isn't
On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 23:22 -0400, Dean Herington wrote:
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 20:19:50 -0400
With gtk2hs, using -optl-mwindows as a command line option for GHC lets
me get rid of this window. Perhaps it will do the same for wxHaskell?
Yes, that did the trick! Thanks a lot!
But now
Hi,
some time ago I started a Tcl-C compiler in Haskell. It should compile
Tcl code to an Tcl extension.
http://wiki.tcl.tk/17385
http://88.198.17.44/~fridolin/tclc/ (darcs)
Few tests (e.g. recursive from shootout) are much faster than Tcl
(original) interpreter but a lot of tests are slower.
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Claus Reinke wrote:
for all that i like monadic programming in general, i often feel
that it is biased towards handling only the success path well,
by offering built-in support for a single continuation only.
Certainly one path gets privileged over the others, I don't
On Jun 30, 2007, at 6:31 AM, Claus Reinke wrote:
has anyone else had similar experiences with expressive limitations
of monadic programming? things that one might be able to work
around, but that don't feel as natural or simple as they should be?
things that one hasn't been able to express at
Still struggling with this. If anyone has any constructive ideas?
I guess it's not really easy otherwise someone would have come up with a
solution by now ;-)
The issue is the line in makeConstrM'' where we're trying to read (Data a =
a) from (String). read doesnt work, because read needs a
Have you used Parsec?
i read about it when it came out, but i've always defined my own
combinators. in case you wonder, there are two reasons for this:
(a) the approximation of parsers as monads is close enough that a simple
type Parser m a = StateT String m a
gives us the basic
On 6/30/07, Duncan Coutts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 23:22 -0400, Dean Herington wrote:
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 20:19:50 -0400
With gtk2hs, using -optl-mwindows as a command line option for GHC lets
me get rid of this window. Perhaps it will do the same for wxHaskell?
Gregory Propf gregorypropf at yahoo.com writes:
First post. I'm a newbie, been using Haskell for about a
week and love it. Anyway, this is something I don't
understand. Parsers are monadic. I can see this if the
parser is reading from an input stream but if there's just a
block of text can't
At 8:13 PM +0300 6/30/07, Esa Ilari Vuokko wrote:
On 6/30/07, Duncan Coutts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 23:22 -0400, Dean Herington wrote:
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 20:19:50 -0400
With gtk2hs, using -optl-mwindows as a command line option for GHC lets
me get rid of this
For the application I'm building, besides being able to launch it as
above, I want also to be able to invoke it (normally from a command
line). A program so invoked can interact with its invoker, and the
invoker awaits the program's completion and gets its termination
status.
From what Esa
Eric devnull1999 at yahoo.com writes:
Looks as if others may be answering questions you didn't ask.
I should read more carefully before posting: Big Chris did answer your
question, though phrased differently than I did.
--Eric
___
Haskell-Cafe
I'd like to have a state monad with the feature that I can somehow
annotate using the type system that some functions are only going to
read the state and not modify it. Such read-only functions are only
permitted to call other read-only functions, whereas state-modifying
functions can call both
Thanks, that was helpful. I didn't realize that there were pure functional
monads.
--
Monadic just means a calculation using a mathematical structure
called a monad. All impure calculations in Haskell are monadic, but
not all monadic
Ken Takusagawa wrote:
I'd like to have a state monad with the feature that I can somehow
annotate using the type system that some functions are only going to
read the state and not modify it. Such read-only functions are only
permitted to call other read-only functions, whereas state-modifying
So I tried implementing a more efficient sha1 in haskell, and i got to
about 12 times slower as C. The darcs implementation is also around
10 to 12 times slower, and the crypto one is about 450 times slower.
I haven't yet unrolled the loop like the darcs implementation does, so
I can still get
Hi Ken,
2007/7/1, Ken Takusagawa [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'd like to have a state monad with the feature that I can somehow
annotate using the type system that some functions are only going to
read the state and not modify it.
I would suggest declaring a MonadReader instance for State, and
writing
Bulat Ziganshin-2 wrote:
Hello SevenThunders,
Saturday, June 30, 2007, 7:45:57 AM, you wrote:
My own code is half Haskell and half C. My build process is rather
complex
i have the same. initially C code was compiled by gcc but finally i
switched to ghc-only compilation. it's also
aeyakovenko:
So I tried implementing a more efficient sha1 in haskell, and i got to
about 12 times slower as C. The darcs implementation is also around
10 to 12 times slower, and the crypto one is about 450 times slower.
I haven't yet unrolled the loop like the darcs implementation does, so
28 matches
Mail list logo
