On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Tommy Thorn tt1...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Jun 2, 2013, at 12:52 , Henry Laxen nadine.and.he...@pobox.com wrote:
Yes, that was it. The dell was a 32 bit system, and the desktop a 64. I
changed everything from Int to Integer, and now both agree. Thanks for
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Johan Holmquist holmi...@gmail.com wrote:
By agressive optimisation I mean an optimisation that drastically
reduces run-time performance of (some part of) the program. So I guess
automatic vectorisation could fall into this term.
Even something like running the
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Francisco Vieira de Souza
vieira.u...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Simon! Is it not necessary to show the type of igraph_bool_t
igraphhaskell_initialized like
int igraph_bool_t igraphhaskell_initialized = 0?
igraphhaskell_initialized is the name of the variable,
On 29 Nov 2012 12:27 PM, Leon Smith leon.p.sm...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I took Bardur's suggestion and avoided all the complexities of
GHC's IO stack and simply used System.Posix.IO and Foreign.This appears
to work, but for better or worse, it is using blocking calls to the
read system
On Aug 27, 2012 8:40 PM, Erik Hesselink hessel...@gmail.com wrote:
The other question is how useful test suites in a released package
are. Aren't they much more useful (and used more often) in source
repositories?
Having tests available in a released package allows one to verify that the
Forgot to copy the list. Sorry for the duplicates :(
On Jul 24, 2012 1:35 PM, Tristan Seligmann mithra...@mithrandi.net
wrote:
On Jul 24, 2012 12:32 PM, Twan van Laarhoven twa...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2012-07-24 10:10, Christian Sternagel wrote:
Dear all,
with respect to formal
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Steve Schafer st...@fenestra.com wrote:
On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 20:38:49 -0700, you wrote:
* The difference between genders is smaller than the difference between
individuals
If only people would understand and accept the near-universality of
this:
The
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Conal Elliott co...@conal.net wrote:
I don't like this bias toward singling out Monad among all of the type
classes, thereby perpetuating the misleading mystique surrounding Monad. If
you're going to call [3,5,8] a monadic value, then please give equal time
to
* Peter Verswyvelen bugf...@gmail.com [2009-02-25 23:15:24 +0100]:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Peter Hercek pher...@gmail.com wrote:
* An LGPL library will force commercial users to release their source code
only to the users of their program (which already bought it) and only for
* Achim Schneider bars...@web.de [2009-02-20 15:17:14 +0100]:
Conal Elliott co...@conal.net wrote:
DRAFT version ___ comments please
Conal, please, PLEASE, never, EVER again use the word meaning if you
actually mean denotation. It confuses the hell out of me, especially
the (I guess
* Duncan Coutts duncan.cou...@worc.ox.ac.uk [2009-02-13 12:19:29 +]:
Can we do that just for one user agent? I don't think we want to use
non-standard stuff in general. Apparently Content-Disposition is not in
the official HTTP spec, but IE is known to follow it.
Well, it's mentioned in
* Henning Thielemann lemm...@henning-thielemann.de [2009-02-05 23:34:53
+0100]:
Peter Verswyvelen schrieb:
3) hg addrem
this adds new files and removes deleted files from local repos.
forgetting to add files is a common problem, and is really tricky since
no record is made of these
* Jeremy Shaw jer...@n-heptane.com [2009-01-25 09:19:23 -0600]:
I believe there are two solutions to your problem:
1. set the Reply-to header yourself to specify how you want people to
reply to messages you post. If you only want them to do to the list,
then set that. Some email clients
* Alex Ott alex...@gmail.com [2009-01-22 20:32:26 +0100]:
PUT http://127.0.0.1:5984/test1/Users_ott_tmp_1_tst HTTP/1.1
Content-Type: ...
...
Host: 127.0.0.1:5984
...
Note that this is a valid HTTP request, according to my reading of RFC2616.
--
mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer
* John Goerzen jgoer...@complete.org [2009-01-15 10:15:36 -0600]:
If you're learning Haskell, which communicates the idea more clearly:
* Appendable
or
* Monoid
I can immediately figure out what the first one means.
I think that's deceptively misleading. Sure, list1 `mappend`
* Andrew Coppin andrewcop...@btinternet.com [2009-01-16 22:20:35 +]:
A problem I see a lot of [and other people have mentioned this] is that
a lot of documentation presents highly abstracted things, and gives *no
hint* of why on earth these might possibly be useful for something.
I
* Andrew Coppin andrewcop...@btinternet.com [2008-12-16 20:23:50 +]:
I think the accusation is more that Haskell tries to be cryptic and
arcane *on purpose*, just to confuse people.
Sure, there are many concepts in Haskell which just aren't found
anywhere else. But monads?
* Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com [2008-12-17 09:10:55 +0100]:
Oh please no, please don't let the logo be something that says Haskell,
it's all about monads.
I don't see anyone complaining about the python logo being something
that says Python, it's all about snakes (Python is named after
18 matches
Mail list logo
