Salute Simon, hi everybody here!
Ian is scientific in his observations and has a valid point. I share his
objection to the Haskell list as unnecessarily misleading newcomers which, I
would add, sets precedents for others to be verbose. Then, creating a Beginner
list is less fortunate than
,
-Andrzej Jaworski
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Flooding haskell-cafe with extra traffic from haskel@ will lead to
comp.soft-sys.matlab syndrom where few people read anything but their own
postings and discussion is virtually unknown. I can see only two options
available to us right now to preserve readability in the fast growing Haskell
and
lebbeling. And to what pathology it leads when unattended see
comp.soft-sys.matlab.
Cheers,
-Andrzej Jaworski
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
clean, the world is wrong. Alleluia!
Cheers,
- Andrzej Jaworski
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On 2/26/07, Kirsten Chevalier honored me with his attention:
Can you clarify what you mean by this? How do you formally prove that
a programming language (rather than a specific implementation of one)
performs better for a given problem? (..)
It is about my saying:SML was exhaustively proved to
Hi,
Indeed, this has been long awaited. Long live Patrick!!!
And continue the good work:-)
However, such essential work shouldn't be dependent on heroic effort of an
individual. If Haskell is to remain non-commercial a disciplined community
effort should be taken akin to Pythonian. Perhaps also
effort is inevitable. Complementary
librairs should be chained and updated together like toolboxes in
Matlab, which might encourage writers to dedicate domain specific
articles or a book around them.
Cheers,
-Andrzej Jaworski
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing
Haskell is? and with my
Santa Close
emphasising Haskell's purity and my simplicity.
Here: http://haskell.org/sitewiki/images/7/79/WCF.Andrzej.Jaworski.gif
Have fun,
-Andrzej Jaworski
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http
Hi Luke,
When neurosurgeons split the brain into left and right hemisphere cutting it
along corpus callosum
the patient will talk to you with his left
half and right half independently - each time unaware what his other half was
talking about a moment
earlier. I believe Zen emulates such
split
Arnaud Bailly kindly exposed my mistake: I cited Leibniz Monadology attributing
it to Spinoza. Call
me idiot but it wasn't thoughtless mistake, I really mixed up Spinoza's concept
of 'modes' with
Leibniz's concept of 'monad'. But it is because of my laziness rather than
foolishness (at least
Hi Andrew, and thank you for invitation.
Well, what can I say. I am glad that the wise game can spark spirit of
cooperation here. Perhaps it is time for Mr. Haskell to leave stale
university rooms and go out for beer:-)
On my part I can promise to watch the project and perhaps, architecture
Hi Andrew and all the involved,
The idea is great. It will allow programming with a rewording feeling of
depth to the exercise right from the start. However tackling some of the
topics you mentioned, like GA, one first needs to develop new solid
programming techniques that would circumvent
Hi Andrew and all the involved,
The idea is great. It will allow programming with a rewording feeling of
depth to the exercise right from the start. However tackling some of the
topics you mentioned, like GA, one first needs to develop new solid
programming techniques that would circumvent
If you answer because H98 is obsolete, then file this away as a
must-read after H' is released
Ideas always originate in a single mind. Good ideas are only footnotes to
the best idea that determine them.
Now: a team of people with different views on the same thing can achieve
their best
I don't think he would be confused with functor in SML.
Call functors static classes and you cut the language from intuition. In
such language anybody can express anything. But to arrive at something one
needs intuition!
Now, what mathematically blind programmers can gain from learning about
Haskell is rather a Darwinian sort of place.
With whole respect. You need two components for evolution to work: the
survival of the fitness and Generator Of Diversity (GOD).
Now, Haskell attracts originality and easily accommodates changes but nobody
burns tires in testing anything so that
Daniel Fischer has cared to inform me that:
Diversity is generated by mutations.
With due respect, but this is hardly a revelation.
My point was that you need two competing components in relative balance to
grow something meaningful.
Cancer growth is based solely on mutation!
Also I was not
Categories for the Working Mathematician a couple of months ago, and while
it sometimes takes a bit of work it's a very good introduction. The only
caution I have is that if you don't have that strong of a math background,
or hadn't done it in a few years (like myself), you may have to lookup
Haskell borrows from CT but it is too much engineered to be a model for
computational CT.
However you can study it with CT:
http://www.cs.ut.ee/~varmo/papers/thesis.pdf
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On blessed Wed Mar 28 05:52:03 EDT 2007 Simon Marlow wrote:
I support both reducing the prelude to just a few commonly used combinators,
and
requiring an explicit import Prelude. (...)
So YOU are the GOD's angle with the sword!
And thus we leave the orchard for a battlefield. I really
mylist =
[ foo, bar, baz,
qux, quux, foo,
bar, baz, qux ]
Good direction.
Perhaps you can also figure out how to replace the disturbing $ operator?
-Andrzej
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
Perhaps you can also figure out how to replace the disturbing $ operator?
Why is it disturbing?
It is not that I am short on dollar or Eurofobic;-)
It introduces sort of daub aesthetics to the code. Also for someone that puts
strong
emphases on notation signs should have some semiotic
Something out of Unicode?
≬⊳⌁⋆☕⚡‣‸‡⁏•△▴◆◇◊◬◢◮♘♣♲♪◖▻▿轢
Greg Buchholz
Why not Braille alphabet? These guys at least don't complain;-)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
DavidA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggest in place of $. For example:
h x = f g x
I would feel better with : |
Ideally, redesigning Haskell syntax for 21st century should take more
scientific course.
But with know-how here still much lagging we can only tap on experience with
symbol
Are they for working around some problems of HM type systems or do
they give Haskell super-language powers? I guess I could answer these
questions if I understood what FD and GATDs are all about, but I'm not
just there yet. :-)
When you are done with furniture and decide to help us with
To ensure wide penetration of this significant update, Microsoft will be
issuing updated Windows CDs to all licensed customers, free of charge.
The new CDs can be identified by the distinctive holographic Haskell
Inside logo, featuring a holographic version of this[1] portrait
I too was put off by the Num issues though--strange mixture of sophisticated
category theory and lack of a sensible hierarchy of algebraic objects.
Perhaps we should replace CT with lattice theoretic thinking (e.g. functor =
monotonic
function) before cleaning up the type-related mess?
See:
If you called your girlfriend Kitten and on a mountain trip she broke her leg would cry/phone for
help to treat your Kitten or would you use a stupid high-brow term woman?
Or perhaps you would rename Washington Square for My Kitten Square ?
There are hundreds programming languages designed by
Hi,
After recent rant to Hell with Monoids and Mathematics I felt like Galileo
awaiting execution. I
splashed toilet several times but the rant was still there, so I decided to
find a scapegoat for this
malfunctioning. Of cours your mathematic teachers are to blame. They are the
product of
Monads are monoids in categories of functors C - C
Arrows are monoids in subcategories of bifunctors (C^op) x C - C
Trees are a playing ground for functors in general:-)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
Category Theory should speak for itself and I am so glad you guys have seen the
beauty of this
approach.
Yes, Mauro you are right: locally small Freyd categories correspond to monoidal
structure of Arrows,
but the strength in this correspondence is as yet unknown to me. I disagree
however
Yes, it is something unhealthy to seat on a bunch of far reaching ideas and
still use artifact that
even Microsoft tries to shake off (outsourcing their Office XML Ribbons). But
as recent roar about
monoids have shown - those who are Haskell most productive programmers are also
most unlikely
If you have ideas for student projects that you think would benefit the
Haskell community, now is the time to start discussing them on mailing
Here is an idea that if done right might bootstrap Haskell real world
applications with the help of greed
and adrenaline:-)
The ignition:
(0) Bind
If you have ideas for student projects that you think would benefit the
Haskell community, now is the time to start discussing them on mailing
Here is an idea that if done right might bootstrap Haskell real world
applications with the help of greed
and adrenaline:-)
The ignition:
(0) Bind
35 matches
Mail list logo
