a paper which includes this at the Scottish Functional Programming
workshop.
Dominic.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 31/07/2001 22:29:00
To: franka
cc: haskell-cafe
bcc: Dominic Steinitz
Subject: Re: newbie conceptual question [from haskell list]
Hi,
Frank Atanassow wrote:
D. Tweed
franka
haskell-cafe
bcc:
Subject:Re: newbie conceptual question [from haskell list]
Is the LDAP client available somewhere?
-Alex-
On 1 Aug 2001, Steinitz, Dominic J wrote:
I don't know about functional dependencies but using an existential type
turned out to be very useful
Important confession since Fergus is in the discussion: I've not actually
read any of the C or C++ standards; I've got an impression of what they
say from various textbooks and the gcc mailing lists.
On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Fergus Henderson wrote:
But there are so *many* such stupidities.
If
[Fergus Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Could you be more specific about exactly which kinds of optimizations
you are referring to here?
If/when multiple-CPU machines become common, so that automatic
parallelization is a serious issue, then it will be much more important.
But currently the
matt heilige wrote:
this brings up another issue that has, up to this point, not
been mentioned... the well-understood (and theoretically guaranteed)
properties of functional languages allow compilers/interpreters to do some
much smarter things with functional constructs... this allows very
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Frank Atanassow wrote:
also safety, and theorems for free. Then there are other properties
which
are obvious (to a programmer) in a Haskell program which get buried in
the
equivalent C(++) program, e.g., that every member of a data structure is
traversed in a fold (no
D. Tweed wrote:
Yes, I guess it's time for a confession: I'm making a rather sweeping
assumption that the patterns in which I do and don't program are in some
way `average' or `typical', even though they probably aren't. For
instance, I don't even use patterns like `a[b++]=c;' just because it
[Frank Atanassow [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[redirected from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
David Hughes wrote:
It seems to me that I can still use functional
programming paradigm with an imperative language. How can I benefit more
from a functional programming language
I'd like to respectfully disagree with some of this :-)
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Frank Atanassow wrote:
These things are nice, but the more I learn about functional languages, the
more I feel that they are only icing on the cake. The most important thing
about functional languages is that we
