Oleg provided the following code to test whether a is a function, this code
will not type check in hugs, due to the overlapping instances in
IsFunction (x-y) f
IsFunction x f
and the functional dependency | a- b
ERROR isfunction.lhs:43 - Instances are not consistent with dependencies
***
You may be right...but learning is not an atomic thingwherever I
start I will get strange things happening.
-Original Message-
From: Bulat Ziganshin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03 January 2008 18:59
To: Nicholls, Mark
Cc: Bulat Ziganshin; haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Subject: Re[6]:
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008, Peter Verswyvelen wrote:
I believe type signatures are the very essence of Haskell documentation!
I'd much rather see a program with type signatures for functions and
little (or no) comments over programs with no type signatures and
ambigious comments (if any comments
David Roundy wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:11:40AM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
David Roundy wrote:
Anyhow, could you retry this test with the above change in methodology, and
let me know if (a) the pull is still slow the first time and (b) if it's
much faster the second time (after the
Felipe Lessa wrote:
Ryan Ingram wrote:
[snip]
data Prompt (p :: * - *) :: (* - *) where
PromptDone :: result - Prompt p result
-- a is the type needed to continue the computation
Prompt :: p a - (a - Prompt p result) - Prompt p result
[snip]
runPromptM :: Monad m = (forall a. p a
On Jan 4, 2008 9:59 AM, apfelmus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felipe Lessa wrote:
How can we prove that (runPromptM prompt === id)? I was trying to go with
You probably mean
runPromptM id = id
Actually, I meant an specialization of 'runPromptM prompt':
runPromptM id :: (Monad p) =
Ryan Dickie wrote:
Maybe I am asking an uninformed n00b question but how come GHC has
fvia-C and are also working on an asm backend. Is there any reason why
they could not build off the work of LLVM (which supports various
architectures) then ditch those two backends and call it a day?
You
Types cannot always be derived automatically, especially when coming to
Haskell extensions. Sometimes you also want to restrict the type. E.g. for
asTypeOf _ y = y
you explicitly want the type
asTypeOf :: a - a - a
not the automatically derived one:
asTypeOf :: b - a - a
Yes, sometimes it
the same is possible for Haskell - it's possible to add to code type
signatures deduced by the compiler
Ha! Yes, HaRe also has the facility to do this have I plugged it
enough yet? :-)
Sounds great! But could you add support for arrows so I can use it for my
Yampa experiments? Please? :)
On Jan 4, 2008 4:19 PM, Peter Verswyvelen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but it would be nice to attach some parameter-comment to the types
no? Now a lot of documentation is written in the style the 7th parameter
is Not very user friendly :)
Haddock allows you to put documentation inside
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Peter Verswyvelen wrote:
Yes, sometimes it is neccerary to give an explicit type. But in so many
cases, type inference works fine no? What I usually do, is use the GHCi t:
command, copy/paste that in my code, and then make the type signature more
specific if it has to be.
It's already possible to write
asTypeOf ::
a {- ^ the input value to be passed through -}
- a {- ^ the value is ignored, but the type is unified with the first
parameter -}
- a {- ^ the value of the first parameter -}
Nice. Still using first parameter though ;-)
On Jan 4, 2008 5:52 PM, Peter Verswyvelen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's already possible to write
asTypeOf ::
a {- ^ the input value to be passed through -}
- a {- ^ the value is ignored, but the type is unified with the first
parameter -}
- a {- ^ the value of the first
All --
I've spent some time on cleaning up my hobby blog publishing software
and setting up a darcs repository, so I'll throw it out there for
criticism or suggestions:
darcs get http://datapr0n.com/repos/perpubplat
It's running my blog (http://mult.ifario.us).
It's relatively lightweight in
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Peter Verswyvelen wrote:
It's already possible to write
asTypeOf ::
a {- ^ the input value to be passed through -}
- a {- ^ the value is ignored, but the type is unified with the first
parameter -}
- a {- ^ the value of the first parameter -}
Nice.
Nice. Still using first parameter though ;-)
This was the problem I mentioned earlier.
I tend to write comments like
{- | @asTypeOf x y@ returns the value of @x@, while the types of @x@ and
@y@ are unified -}
asTypeOf :: a - a - a
This way I can introduce parameter names for the reader.
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 06:12:05PM +, Adrian Hey wrote:
..the latest version is 1.9. But the latest version in Hackage is 1.6,
the latest version in the ftp downloads dir is 1.8, unless you want a
pre-compiled windows version in which case you're stuck with 1.3 :-)
The history looks like
On 2008.01.02 17:20:04 +, Duncan Coutts [EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled 0.8K
characters:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Neil
Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
The hackage web page confuses me:
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/hackage.html
Hackage has now graduated from being a
2.5 years after the first release, bytestring 0.9.0.4 is now available
on hackage,
http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/bytestring-0.9.0.4
Changes since the 0.9 release include:
* support for bytestring literals (use -XOverloadedStrings)
* make
19 matches
Mail list logo
