[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I suggest that you read something on 'quantum computing'.
I guess I should disclaim the rest of my post right away: I don't know
much about quantum anything, beyond what I read in the newspapers.
Sorry. But:
Concerning quanta, the simulation of quantum processes on
Currently, yes; I was experimenting with type families. But it's pretty
simple to get it to compile on 6.6.1:
- remove the {-# LANGUAGE #-} pragma and replace with {-# OPTIONS_GHC
-fglasgow-exts -fallow-undecidable-instances #-}
- change the class declaration for MonadPrompter from
class Monad
If I understand correctly, a quantum computer might solve problems in
NP in polynomial time, which is assumed not to be possible for
deterministic computers.
No! Moreover, there is a hypothesis that the only problems quantum
computer can solve in polynomial time are those that the usual
On 12/30/07, Miguel Mitrofanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I understand correctly, a quantum computer might solve problems in
NP in polynomial time, which is assumed not to be possible for
deterministic computers.
No! Moreover, there is a hypothesis that the only problems quantum
G'day all.
I think it was Ketil Malde who said:
If I understand correctly, a quantum computer might solve problems in
NP in polynomial time, which is assumed not to be possible for
deterministic computers.
Quoting Miguel Mitrofanov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
No! Moreover, there is a hypothesis
On Dec 30, 2007 2:43 PM, Jake McArthur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Really? This code doesn't even really make any sense to me. In order
to be an instance of Bar, t has to already be an instance of Foo,
implying that the function hi is already defined for t. What would the
function in this example
Ketil Malde writes:
I guess I should disclaim the rest of my post right away: I don't know
much about quantum anything, beyond what I read in the newspapers.
I answer here, but there were other contributions, of Ryan Ingram, Miguel
Mitrofanov, and Andrew Bromage, which I acknowledge. People,
(The full code used for this message is available at
http://ryani.freeshell.org/haskell/systemf.hs)
System F is the polymorphically typed lambda calculus. It is strongly typed
but allows polymorphic functions like id.
id is represented as follows:
eId = EGamma A (ELam x TVar EVar)
which
People are often unsure about where they can help out with Cabal. One
thing we can do to make that easier is to point out smaller simpler
tasks that people might like to have a go at.
We have a list of tasks that are marked as easy or very easy:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/hackage/report/13
Hello,
perhaps i will make a wishlist of topics not dealt in the tutorials. Here is
something i miss in each of them: notes at the semantics of data constructors.
We read
data Pair a b = Pair a b
in YetAnotherHaskellTutorial. And that is all ! If we omit data here, this
would be a silly
Hello Joost,
Sunday, December 30, 2007, 5:24:59 PM, you wrote:
data ClockTime = TOD Integer Integer
it declares type with name ClockTime (which you may use on type
signatures, other type declarations and so on) with one constructor
TOD accepting two Integer values. the only way to construct
On Dec 30, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Joost Behrends wrote:
For adapting hws (one of the reasons for me to be here, not many
languages have
a native web server) to Windows i must work on time. In System.Time
i found
data ClockTime = TOD Integer Integer
2 questions arise here: Does this define TOD
That's why I like this group so much, very interesting stuff to read, even if
it isn't about Haskell. The problem is that I understand only 1% of it, even if
it is about Haskell ;-)
Regarding this the universe is a turing machine: until a couple of years ago,
I also was someone that believed
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 21:12:21 +0200, Achim Schneider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Try writing a program that makes me say hello world as many times as
you press my nose.
Be careful what you wish for. :-)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 21:49:16 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29 Dec 2007, at 5:01 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
By portable I mean: works on the same machine, with the same OS, but
with different Haskell implementation.
Ah, you can't. But, again, what are you trying to do?
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 17:14 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 21:49:16 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29 Dec 2007, at 5:01 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
By portable I mean: works on the same machine, with the same OS, but
with different Haskell
Peter Verswyvelen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Regarding this the universe is a turing machine: until a couple of
years ago, I also was someone that believed that (A) the universe
(and life) could be simulated by a computer,
Yesss. Nice. A bit of Escher here:
Imagine an instance of eval
On 30 Dec 2007, at 10:14 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 21:49:16 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29 Dec 2007, at 5:01 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
By portable I mean: works on the same machine, with the same OS,
but with different Haskell implementation.
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:39:51 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30 Dec 2007, at 10:14 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 21:49:16 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29 Dec 2007, at 5:01 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
By portable I mean: works on the
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:34:08 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
True, but again, what are you trying to do?
I've already did what I was trying to do.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On 30 Dec 2007, at 10:54 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:39:51 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30 Dec 2007, at 10:14 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 21:49:16 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29 Dec 2007, at 5:01 AM,
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 17:55 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:34:08 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
True, but again, what are you trying to do?
I've already did what I was trying to do.
Congrats. How?
___
In section 4.3.3., chapter 4: Structured types and the semantics of
pattern-matching, by S.Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler, there is this
equation:
Eval[[\(s p1 p2 ... pt).E]] (s a1 a2 ...at) = Eval[[\p1 ... \pt.E]] a1 ...
at
The text say:
To apply \(s p1 ... pt).E to an argument A we
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 19:10:44 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 17:55 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:34:08 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
True, but again, what are you trying to do?
I've already did what I was
On 30 Dec 2007, at 11:10 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
In section 4.3.3., chapter 4: Structured types and the semantics of
pattern-matching, by S.Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler, there is
this equation:
Eval[[\(s p1 p2 ... pt).E]] (s a1 a2 ...at) = Eval[[\p1 ... \pt.E]]
a1 ... at
The text
On 30 Dec 2007, at 11:12 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 19:10:44 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 17:55 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:34:08 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
True, but again, what are
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 19:02:11 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30 Dec 2007, at 10:54 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:39:51 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30 Dec 2007, at 10:14 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 21:49:16
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 19:13:47 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30 Dec 2007, at 11:10 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
In section 4.3.3., chapter 4: Structured types and the semantics of
pattern-matching, by S.Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler, there is this
equation:
Eval[[\(s p1
On 30 Dec 2007, at 11:16 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 19:02:11 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30 Dec 2007, at 10:54 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:39:51 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30 Dec 2007, at 10:14 AM,
Hi Cristian,
On Dec 30, 2007 6:10 PM, Cristian Baboi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I don't get it :
(s a1 a2 ... at) must be the value of A in the semantic domain. Let call
that value a.
Then how can one know if a was built with (s a1 a2 ... at) and not with
(egg b1 b2) ?
Because the
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 19:16:04 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want help, you would have an easier time getting it if you came
here with /programming/ problems. Most of us enjoy programming quite a
bit, and are eager to help with such, but this sort of thing is more of
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 19:19:11 +0200, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When you can convince me that continuing this discussion will be of use
/to the Haskell community/, I will until then, goodbye.
I won't even try to do that.
Goodbye.
___
Thank you. The thing is that when talking about the semantic of Prolog,
one can choose any set as the semantic domain to start, and then a reason
is given for choosing the Herbrand universe.
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 19:23:00 +0200, Benja Fallenstein
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Cristian,
On
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 18:16 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
A simple question:
Can you write the value of x to a file where x = (1:x) ?
Not in finite time and space :)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:00:05 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 18:16 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
A simple question:
Can you write the value of x to a file where x = (1:x) ?
Not in finite time and space :)
I used the word 'value' by mistake.
A
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 19:04 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:00:05 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 18:16 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
A simple question:
Can you write the value of x to a file where x = (1:x) ?
Not in
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:24:23 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 19:04 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:00:05 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 18:16 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
A simple
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 19:31 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:24:23 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 19:04 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:00:05 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag,
Cristian Baboi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:00:05 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 18:16 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
A simple question:
Can you write the value of x to a file where x = (1:x) ?
Not in finite time and
Thanks to both fast answers.
there remain problems with Jakes mail for me. This:
When you define datatypes, you are essentially defining a type-level
constructors on the left hand side and (value-level) constructors on
the right hand side.
is very useful for me. data defines TWO
On Dec 30, 2007 9:24 AM, Joost Behrends [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A similar point: The tutorials teach, that = has a similar meaning than
= in
mathematics. But there is a big difference: it is not reflexive. The
the right side is the definition of the left. Thus x=y has still some
kind of
Cristian Baboi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
module Module where
a= let x=1:x in x
main = do something to write a (a notation for a) to file
The function must work if one change a to let x=2:x in x, let
x=1:2:3:x and variations on the same theme.
import GHC?
you can even load it directly
2007/12/30, Joost Behrends [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
. Now, let's say we had tried defining ClockTime with parameters as
you suggested.
ClockTime' :: Integer - Integer - *
Do you see the problem? In order to use the ClockTime type
constructor, we would have to use Integer values.
2007/12/30, Cristian Baboi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
A simple question:
Can you write the value of x to a file where x = (1:x) ?
Yes, but you'll have to write it yourself, because Haskell can't
decide by itself that this value is infinite and try to print it with
a recursive definition, if it could
2007/12/30, Chaddaï Fouché [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2007/12/30, Cristian Baboi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
A simple question:
Can you write the value of x to a file where x = (1:x) ?
Yes, but you'll have to write it yourself, because Haskell can't
decide by itself that this value is infinite and try to
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007, Adam Langley wrote:
Some packages[1] have links on their Hackage pages to the haddock
generated documentation for each exported module[2]. However, many[3]
don't.
What's the secret to getting this generated documentation to work with
Hackage? Even packages for which
On Dec 30, 2007, at 12:32 PM, Joost Behrends wrote:
Thanks to both fast answers.
there remain problems with Jakes mail for me. This:
When you define datatypes, you are essentially defining a type-level
constructors on the left hand side and (value-level) constructors on
the right hand side.
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007, Joost Behrends wrote:
A similar point: The tutorials teach, that = has a similar meaning than =
in
mathematics. But there is a big difference: it is not reflexive. The
the right side is the definition of the left. Thus x=y has still some kind
of
temporality, which
I am proving various statements relating to applicative functors, using
the Coq proof assistant (I am considering only Coq terms, which always
terminate so you don't have to worry about _|_). However, I'm not sure
how to go about proving a certain conjecture, which, translated back
into Haskell
Thanks for that info:
Several people have adapted and further developed HWS:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Applications_and_libraries/Web_programming#Web_servers
http://darcs.haskell.org/hws/
http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~thiemann/WASH/ (WSP)
There is also a mailing
Robin Green wrote:
I am proving various statements relating to applicative functors, using
the Coq proof assistant (I am considering only Coq terms, which always
terminate so you don't have to worry about _|_). However, I'm not sure
how to go about proving a certain conjecture, which,
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello Ben,
Saturday, December 29, 2007, 7:14:47 PM, you wrote:
for a computer is superfluous here. people are not smarter than
computers and can't do anything that's impossible for computers
I don't think my computer can be sorry, but I know I can be.
i've about
On 2007-12-28, ChrisK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Other note:
An imperative language, such as C++ or Java, specified the binary output of
any instance of the compiler. Class methods will have very specific names and
addresses. In C++ you can even get the member-function pointer values and
So a simple thing occured to me today. Rather than worry about the
correct behavior for a join/split pair, we should just add
unintercalate to the library. A bit verbose as a name, but at least
there's no ambiguity.
--s
On Dec 29, 2007, at 2:18 PM, David Roundy wrote:
On Fri, Dec 28,
Parser combinators basically provide generalized regexes, and they all
take lists of arbitrary tokens rather than just Chars. I've written a
simple combinator library before that dispenses with all the monadic
goodness in favor of a group combinator and returning [Either [tok]
[tok]],
On Dec 30, 2007, at 7:18 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
You seem to be content to be cheated. You even seem to believe that
there /is no/ cheating involved, even if I program the computer so
that you
just /think/ it has emotions.
Remember the chinese room!
Urgh, I was going to stay out of this,
G'day all.
Quoting David Menendez [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
data A = B
means that B constructs a value of type A. The = acts more like the
::= in a BNF grammar.
And, indeed, that was the syntax for it in Miranda.
It is *not* a claim that A equals B, since A is a
type and B is a data
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 21:07:44 +0200, Daniel Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 19:31 schrieb Cristian Baboi:
I mean this:
module Module where
a= let x=1:x in x
main = do something to write a (a notation for a) to file
The function must work if one change a
Thank you.
data Something = This | S Something
ppp :: Something - String
ppp This =
ppp (S x) = 'S':(ppp x)
How can I prevent one to pass 'let x = S x in x' to ppp ?
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 23:25:19 +0200, Chaddaï Fouché
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2007/12/30, Chaddaï Fouché [EMAIL
How about
a :: Something
a = let x = x in x
ppp a
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 09:11:12 +0200, Cristian Baboi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Thank you.
data Something = This | S Something
ppp :: Something - String
ppp This =
ppp (S x) = 'S':(ppp x)
How can I prevent one to pass 'let x = S x in
60 matches
Mail list logo
