On Jul 18, 2009, at 9:26 PM, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
I don’t think, it’s a good idea to have German identifiers, since
Haskell’s
keywords are English.
Put it this way: if Haskell's keywords were in German, do you
suppose I would write my Haskell code in anything but English?
Does the
Am Sonntag, 19. Juli 2009 23:42 schrieben Sie:
On Jul 18, 2009, at 9:26 PM, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
I don’t think, it’s a good idea to have German identifiers, since
Haskell’s keywords are English.
Put it this way: if Haskell's keywords were in German, do you suppose I
would write my
Am Samstag, 18. Juli 2009 06:31 schrieben Sie:
On Jul 18, 2009, at 2:35 AM, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
So I should upload a package with German identifiers to Hackage?
Sure, why not? The fact that I can't read it is my loss, not your fault,
and there will be plenty of other German-reading
On 18 Jul 2009, at 13:26, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Am Samstag, 18. Juli 2009 06:31 schrieben Sie:
On Jul 18, 2009, at 2:35 AM, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
So I should upload a package with German identifiers to Hackage?
Sure, why not? The fact that I can't read it is my loss, not your
fault,
Am Dienstag, 7. Juli 2009 14:42 schrieb Robin Green:
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:44:51 +0200
Wolfgang Jeltsch g9ks1...@acme.softbase.org wrote:
PASCAL
uses “program”, not “programme”,
The word program (as in computer program) is spelled program in both
British and American English.
Probably
Am Mittwoch, 15. Juli 2009 05:27 schrieben Sie:
On Jul 10, 2009, at 8:44 PM, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Why do we use English for identifiers? Because English is the language of
computer science. What English should we use? It’s tempting to say, we
should use the original English, which is
Wolfgang Jeltsch schrieb:
Am Mittwoch, 15. Juli 2009 05:27 schrieben Sie:
On Jul 10, 2009, at 8:44 PM, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Why do we use English for identifiers? Because English is the language of
computer science. What English should we use? It’s tempting to say, we
should use the
On Jul 18, 2009, at 2:27 AM, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Probably just because British English took it from American English.
It’s
similar to the “German” word “Computer”. It’s not native.
The spelling program goes back to 1633 at least;
it cannot then have referred to computers, and is
not
On Jul 18, 2009, at 2:35 AM, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
So I should upload a package with German identifiers to Hackage?
Sure, why not? The fact that I can't read it is my loss,
not your fault, and there will be plenty of other German-
reading Haskellers to benefit from it. I've happily worked
On Jul 10, 2009, at 8:44 PM, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Am Freitag, 10. Juli 2009 05:26 schrieb rocon...@theorem.ca:
I find it amazing that you independently chose to spell colour with
a `u'.
It makes me feel better about my choice.
I have to admit that it makes me unhappy. :-(
Why do we
It’s tempting to say, we should
use the original English, which is British English.
Some suggest the original English remained in Britain when the North
American colonies were founded; others claim it was brought to the
Americas by the British settlers, leaving a pale imitation back in
Britain.
Am Freitag, 10. Juli 2009 05:26 schrieb rocon...@theorem.ca:
I find it amazing that you independently chose to spell colour with a `u'.
It makes me feel better about my choice.
I have to admit that it makes me unhappy. :-(
Why do we use English for identifiers? Because English is the language
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:44:51 +0200
Wolfgang Jeltsch g9ks1...@acme.softbase.org wrote:
PASCAL
uses “program”, not “programme”,
The word program (as in computer program) is spelled program in both
British and American English.
--
Robin
___
Max Rabkin wrote:
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Andrew
Coppinandrewcoppin at btinternet.com wrote:
A few reasons:
1. I never knew it existed. ;-)
A good reason. However, it's good to do a quick search over Hackage
before uploading (or before writing) so you know what's out there.
Also,
OK, so having released AC-HalfInteger, I got slightly carried away and
released three other small packages. These are packages that many
programs I write all end up using. I'm forever copying these files, so I
made them into actual bonafide packages.
On Sat, Jul 04, 2009 at 06:56:44PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/AC-Colour-1.1.1
Why don't you use colour[1]?
[1] http://hackage.haskell.org/package/colour
--
Felipe.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Felipe Lessa wrote:
On Sat, Jul 04, 2009 at 06:56:44PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/AC-Colour-1.1.1
Why don't you use colour[1]?
[1] http://hackage.haskell.org/package/colour
A few reasons:
1. I never knew it existed. ;-)
2. It's
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Andrew
Coppinandrewcop...@btinternet.com wrote:
A few reasons:
1. I never knew it existed. ;-)
A good reason. However, it's good to do a quick search over Hackage
before uploading (or before writing) so you know what's out there.
Also, if you hadn't used an AC-
Max Rabkin wrote:
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Andrew
Coppinandrewcop...@btinternet.com wrote:
A few reasons:
1. I never knew it existed. ;-)
A good reason. However, it's good to do a quick search over Hackage
before uploading (or before writing) so you know what's out there.
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Andrew
Coppinandrewcop...@btinternet.com wrote:
2. It's mind-blowingly complex.
Colour *is* complex. Which is why I'm so glad Russell O'Connor did all
the hard work for me :)
Well, no, because now I'm going to have to spend a few hours trying to find
out
Paul Johnson wrote:
Andrew Coppin wrote:
Well, no, because now I'm going to have to spend a few hours trying
to find out what CIE is before I can even use that library.
I think really it's just aimed at a different problem. It looks like
it's trying to specify actual real-world colours.
On Jul 4, 2009, at 15:01 , Max Rabkin wrote:
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Andrew
Coppinandrewcop...@btinternet.com wrote:
3. It doesn't appear to provide arithmetic over colours.
It provides darken, blend and addition (though addition is called
mappend rather than (+)). signum, abs and
22 matches
Mail list logo
