On 09/28/11 12:47 AM, Anthony Cowley wrote:
I am not aware of as good a story for Arduino-level development. Atom
may be an appropriate foundation for such an effort, but I also hope
that we can get GHC ARM support sorted out, and then use platforms
like the forthcoming Raspberry Pi as the
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 28.09.2011, 09:30 +0200 schrieb Karel Gardas:
Please note GHCi support is still missing...
which implies that Template Haskell does not work. So if you are
considering using TH in your library when it is avoidable, remember that
you are making your code unusable on most
So currently, it's okay to make Haskell code that targets Android
smartphones, the Beagleboard, the Raspberry Pi or the OpenPandora as long as
you use the development version of GHC?
2011/9/28 Karel Gardas karel.gar...@centrum.cz
On 09/28/11 12:47 AM, Anthony Cowley wrote:
I am not aware of
On 09/28/11 10:42 AM, Yves Parès wrote:
So currently, it's okay to make Haskell code that targets Android
smartphones, the Beagleboard, the Raspberry Pi or the OpenPandora as long as
you use the development version of GHC?
No, it's not that easy. As cross-compiling is not working (yet!) then
This means not only kernel should be the same (w.r.t. its
API/functionality) but also standard libc and other runtime libraries.
Yes, this is what I understood. I wasn't talking about portable *binaries*,
just about the ARM platforms which were efficient enough to run GHC.
I guessed one would
Hi,
On 09/28/11 10:35 AM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 28.09.2011, 09:30 +0200 schrieb Karel Gardas:
Please note GHCi support is still missing...
which implies that Template Haskell does not work. So if you are
considering using TH in your library when it is avoidable, remember
Karel Gardas wrote:
Hi,
On 09/28/11 10:35 AM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 28.09.2011, 09:30 +0200 schrieb Karel Gardas:
Please note GHCi support is still missing...
which implies that Template Haskell does not work. So if you are
considering using TH in your library
On 09/28/11 11:06 AM, Yves Parès wrote:
This means not only kernel should be the same (w.r.t. its
API/functionality) but also standard libc and other runtime libraries.
Yes, this is what I understood. I wasn't talking about portable *binaries*,
just about the ARM platforms which were efficient
Yes, but compilation might be damn slow.
I forget about the SheevaPlugs (ARMv5 Kirkwood 1,2 GHz)! They are kind of
cheap for what they offer, it's a very nice embedded platform.
2011/9/28 Karel Gardas karel.gar...@centrum.cz
On 09/28/11 11:06 AM, Yves Parès wrote:
This means not only kernel
On 09/28/11 12:41 PM, Yves Parès wrote:
Yes, but compilation might be damn slow.
I forget about the SheevaPlugs (ARMv5 Kirkwood 1,2 GHz)! They are kind of
cheap for what they offer, it's a very nice embedded platform.
Yes, or you can even attempt to install some ARMv5 linux on ARMv7
platform.
When the robots take over, do you want them to be developed using a
sane language like Haskell or Agda? Or some dangerous untyped OO
language? I think the answer is obvious.
The question is, How?. The robots will not be developed by us, but
by the children of today. So, we must reach their
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Jeremy Shaw jer...@n-heptane.com wrote:
Let's here your ideas!
Here's a post outlining Arduino + Haskell via Atom:
http://leepike.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/twinkle-twinkle-little-haskell/
Atom might be a tool to use for any number of targets, but I haven't
used
On Sep 27, 2011, at 2:01 PM, Jeremy Shaw jer...@n-heptane.com wrote:
When the robots take over, do you want them to be developed using a sane
language like Haskell or Agda? Or some dangerous untyped OO language? I think
the answer is obvious.
The question is, How?. The robots will not be
13 matches
Mail list logo
