Greetings,
You are invited to submit a position paper for this workshop.
Enclosed please find the call for papers.
Would you please send the following announcement to all possible
e-mail lists that you currently have or have access to. I appreciate
your publicizing this workshop
Samson Abramsky, Luke Ong, Tom Melham and myself have just founded the
Centre for Metacomputation at Oxford. We are looking for a 4-year senior
postdoc to help coordinate the activities:
http://web.comlab.ox.ac.uk/oucl/jobs/platform.html
Topics of interest include types for quotation,
CALL FOR PARTICIPATION CALL FOR PARTICIPATION
[ - Apologies for multiple messages;
- Deadline for early registration: Dec 15th]
Eighth International Symposium on
We apologize in advance if you receive multiple copies of this CFP.
-
CALL FOR PAPERS (Extended Submission Deadline)
IEEE WOWMOM 2006
The 7th IEEE International Symposium on a World of Wireless, Mobile and
My 2 cents:
John Lask (Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 08:57:52AM +1030):
I would like to sound out the Haskell community on what the feeling are
most desirable to improve the commerciality (i.e. its general use) of ghc
and Haskell in general (as distinct from feature set)
3) Macro / conditional
hmp3 0.1 : an ncurses mp3 player
hmp3 is a lightweight ncurses-based mp3 player written in Haskell. It
uses mpg321 or mpg123 as its decoding backend. It is designed to be
simple, fast and robust.
A screenshot can be found at:
http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/hmp3.html
Hi guys,
Since discussion has returned to records, it might be useful for me to
post a link to a proposal that I knocked up a while back when this
topic came up a few years ago:
http://www.cambridge.intel-research.net/~rennals/records.pdf
The basic idea is to keep records largely as they are,
(Moved from the libraries list to the haskell
list.)
I wrote:
createItems :: RandomGen g = State g [Item]
createItems =
liftM catMaybes $ runListT $
flip evalStateT initialState $ runMaybeT $
do
item - liftRandom $ repeatM randomItem
updateState item
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 02:32:47PM +, Rob Ennals wrote:
Since discussion has returned to records, it might be useful for me to
post a link to a proposal that I knocked up a while back when this
topic came up a few years ago:
http://www.cambridge.intel-research.net/~rennals/records.pdf
David Roundy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
7. Unordered records: yep (if I understand the problem correctly)
I don't think you understood correctly. What I'd like (and this is another
one of those David-specific issues--I've never heard anyone else complain
about this) is to be able to create
Am Mittwoch, 23. November 2005 14:22 schrieb David Roundy:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 02:32:47PM +, Rob Ennals wrote:
[...]
7. Unordered records: yep (if I understand the problem correctly)
I don't think you understood correctly. What I'd like (and this is another
one of those
Hello,
I just noticed that the GHC/Hugs standard libraries have acquired a
list monad transformer, which is broken, because it does not satisfy
the associativity law when applied to non-commutative monads. I am
not referring to some corner-case strictness problem, but rather a
fairly well known
Hello David,
Wednesday, November 23, 2005, 4:22:47 PM, you wrote:
7. Unordered records: yep (if I understand the problem correctly)
DR I don't think you understood correctly. What I'd like (and this is another
DR one of those David-specific issues--I've never heard anyone else complain
DR
On 24/11/2005, at 9:45 AM, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
Hello,
I just noticed that the GHC/Hugs standard libraries have acquired a
list monad transformer, which is broken, because it does not satisfy
the associativity law when applied to non-commutative monads. I am
not referring to some corner-case
Mun Hon Cheong wrote:
Frag is a 3D First Person Shooting game.
Thanks for releasing this!
It built fine for me with ghc-6.4.1 on Fedora Core 4 x86_64,
but when I run it I get:
frag% ./a.out leveleg
:
:
loaded textures/egyptians/sand_egy.tga
loaded textures/egyptians/leaf.tga
loaded
Bugs item #1363942, was opened at 2005-11-22 16:22
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by simonmar
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=108032aid=1363942group_id=8032
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment
Bugs item #1364837, was opened at 2005-11-23 12:09
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=108032aid=1364837group_id=8032
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of
Bugs item #1364839, was opened at 2005-11-23 12:11
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=108032aid=1364839group_id=8032
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of
| On a similar note, how about the .NET support? Can it work on a
| platform where the only .NET support is Mono?
This comes up regularly. Here's my message from Jan:
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2005-January/0075
94.html
Simon
===
It'd make
This sounds like a good idea to me.
As far as possible, we should keep the platform-dependence restricted to
the implementation of one module (System.Posix.Internals will do, even
though this isn't really POSIX any more). So System.Posix.Internals
exports the CFilePath/CFileOffset types, and the
On 21 November 2005 22:03, Esa Ilari Vuokko wrote:
Attached small simple patch that allows using --mk-dll with --make.
Behaviour before patch was to link .exe instead .dll, as batchmode
simply called staticLink - now doMkDLL is called instead.
* Add support for using --mk-dll with --make
On 22 November 2005 17:18, Michael Marte wrote:
I am having some annoying problems with the 6.x compilers:
6.4 and 6.4.1: When repeating a build (with ghc --make) all modules
are rebuild even if nothing has changed. With earlier compilers,
only linking takes place in this setting.
On 23 November 2005 09:32, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
On a similar note, how about the .NET support? Can it work on a
platform where the only .NET support is Mono?
This comes up regularly. Here's my message from Jan:
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2005-January/0075
6.4 and 6.4.1: When repeating a build (with ghc --make) all modules
are rebuild even if nothing has changed. With earlier compilers,
only linking takes place in this setting. Can I change this
behaviour? I cannot develop this way.
Should not happen, if it does there
Simon,
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 22 November 2005 17:18, Michael Marte wrote:
I am having some annoying problems with the 6.x compilers:
6.4 and 6.4.1: When repeating a build (with ghc --make) all modules
are rebuild even if nothing has changed. With earlier
I would like to do a horrible naughty thing (which I promise never to
expose to the world). I would like to tell whether a term is in
WHNF, without forcing evaluation of that term. Something like:
isWHNF :: a - Bool
Is there a way of doing this? I can fake it with an IORef and much
I downloaded ghc-6.5.20051122-i386-unknown-linux.tar.bz2 and tried to use it
(as bootstrap for building Haskell at first, but building Pugs fails the
same way)
It installed fine.
My attempts to compile something with it result with a following error:
ghc-6.5.20051122: could not execute:
The appended snippet might help..
--sigbjorn
-- whnf.hs
import Foreign.StablePtr
import System.IO.Unsafe
isWHNF :: a - Bool
isWHNF a = unsafePerformIO $ do
stl - newStablePtr a
rc - isWhnf stl
freeStablePtr stl
return (rc /= 0)
foreign import ccall safe isWhnf isWhnf :: StablePtr a -
Hello Simon,
Wednesday, November 23, 2005, 2:28:26 PM, you wrote:
SM int64ToWord64# = unsafeCoerce#
SM word64ToInt64# = unsafeCoerce#
SM this should reduce the cost of the conversions to zero, which is a
SM simpler way to fix the performance bug (if it works).
SM If you confirm that this
Hello Simon,
Wednesday, November 23, 2005, 2:22:02 PM, you wrote:
SM This sounds like a good idea to me.
SM As far as possible, we should keep the platform-dependence restricted to
SM the implementation of one module (System.Posix.Internals will do, even
SM though this isn't really POSIX any
Help build the anticipation:
http://haskell.org/hawiki/GHC_206_2e6
Present text:
GHC 6.6:
Will be out before May 2006.
Included:
* Parallel GHC
* Associated types with class
Maybe:
* Impredicativity
* GADT Typeclass interaction
* Data types as kinds
No:
Jim
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello Simon,
Wednesday, November 23, 2005, 2:28:26 PM, you wrote:
int64ToWord64# = unsafeCoerce#
word64ToInt64# = unsafeCoerce#
this should reduce the cost of the conversions to zero, which is a
simpler way to fix the performance bug (if it works).
If you
| Anyway, it's strange that you are experiencing crashes. IIRC, there
| were problems if you mixed modules compiled with different levels of
| optimisation in the same program, but I am not sure it still happens.
If you can make a reproducible crash, please tar it up and send it to
us. It
Sorry should be fixed now (or shortly when the mirror does its stuff)
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: Bulat Ziganshin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: 22 November 2005 19:28
| To: Simon Peyton-Jones
| Cc: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
| Subject: Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] using of data types
Hi Haskell gurus,
I'm very puzzled on some code I saw in GHC Monad.StateT (which is
about state monad transformers) source and hope you can kindly give me
some insight into this.
newtype StateT s m a = S (s - m (a,s))
instance MonadPlus m = MonadPlus (StateT s m) where
mzero =
Did you encounter any difficulties in your
development because of Haskell?
Well, Haskell is different compared with other languages
like C. I thought collision detection would be easier
if i could use some local or global variables, but i
managed to get around it.
Was lazy evaluation ever a
David Menendez wrote:
Keean Schupke writes:
David Menendez wrote:
Chris Kuklewicz writes:
Would the record system describe at
http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/view/1119
also be convertable into System Fw, GHC's existing, strongly-typeed
intermediate language. ?
Scherrer, Chad wrote:
Maybe my point wasn't clear. Of course this idea of comparing lazy
evaluation to Unix pipes is very old (long before July 2004, I'm sure).
The point I'm making is that there is an old idea that may be underused.
It is, and only because (.) is defined all wrong!
The unix
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 11:17:25AM +0100, Udo Stenzel wrote:
infixl 2 \|
(\|) = flip (.) -- though I'm using ()
The unix pipe becomes (filter (foo `isPrefixOf`) \| sort \| nub) or
something, which is rather neat, and (#) is used to call member
functions, as in
Why not use Control.Arrow. ?
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Udo Stenzel wrote:
Scherrer, Chad wrote:
Maybe my point wasn't clear. Of course this idea of comparing lazy
evaluation to Unix pipes is very old (long before July 2004, I'm sure).
The point I'm making is that there is an old idea that may be underused.
It is, and only
Am Mittwoch, 23. November 2005 10:03 schrieb Fan Wu:
[...]
I'm puzzled over this line:
~(a,s') - lift (mplus m1' m2')
Why is this line in Monad.State.StateT? Recently, we discussed that StateT
does *not* use a lazy pattern here but that it should be changed to using
one. So where did
On 21 November 2005 16:43, Joel Reymont wrote:
I'm being quite careful with resources these days. The outstanding
issues are
1) Crashes on Mac OSX that are not reproduced on Linux, Windows, etc.
2) Some kind of a problem with Chan. getChanContents retrieves things
smoothly, readChan only
On Nov 23, 2005, at 1:18 PM, Simon Marlow wrote:
After subsequent dicsussion, do you still think something strange was
going on here?
Yes, but in a different thread. The Postmortem one.
so this basically loops until there are no messages in the channel,
and
then exits. Is that what you
On 23 November 2005 13:29, Joel Reymont wrote:
On Nov 23, 2005, at 1:18 PM, Simon Marlow wrote:
After subsequent dicsussion, do you still think something strange was
going on here?
Yes, but in a different thread. The Postmortem one.
so this basically loops until there are no messages
Hello haskellers,
in past few days, a lot of stuff on concurrency went through
the conference. I'm trying to use posted things and my own.
They work, even in a context switching regime, but I can't
exploit all the CPU's on my computer. Always is active
just one thread and, thus, the computation
On 11/23/05, Dusan Kolar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello haskellers,
in past few days, a lot of stuff on concurrency went through
the conference. I'm trying to use posted things and my own.
They work, even in a context switching regime, but I can't
exploit all the CPU's on my computer.
Henning Thielemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Since
(a . b) x
a $ b x
a (b x)
are equivalent, do you also want to reverse function and
argument in order to match argument order of . and $ ?
That is
x (b . a)
x b $ a
(x b) a
?
I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand your
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Scherrer, Chad wrote:
Henning Thielemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Since
(a . b) x
a $ b x
a (b x)
are equivalent, do you also want to reverse function and
argument in order to match argument order of . and $ ?
That is
x (b . a)
x b $ a
(x b) a
?
I'm
Henning Thielemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I want to say, that the order of symbols for ($), (.) and
function application is consistent. This is a fine thing. I
think that shall not be distroyed by giving ($) and (.)
reversed argument order.
I see. I like the argument order also,
Udo Stenzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The unix pipe is actually function composition. Its argument
(standard
input) isn't explicitly mentioned
Then it seems Unix must overload the | operator. I typically use it to
do things like
grep . *.hs | wc
So I think of the types as being
grep .
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 09:01:07AM -0800, Scherrer, Chad wrote:
So I think of the types as being
grep . *.hs :: String
wc :: String - Int -- ok, not really, but it shows the point better.
Every unix program has a standard input, even if it doesn't use it, so
I would rather give this type to
HI Wolfgang,
The code is from GHC source
ghc-6.4.1/libraries/monads/Monad/StateT.hs, am I looking at the wrong
place?
I found the thread discussing Monad strictness, where is your StateT defined?
But it is still not clear to me why lazy pattern is used here. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Fan
On
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 08:48:04AM -, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| Anyway, it's strange that you are experiencing crashes. IIRC, there
| were problems if you mixed modules compiled with different levels of
| optimisation in the same program, but I am not sure it still happens.
If you can
On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 08:55 -0800, Scherrer, Chad wrote:
. . .
I see. I like the argument order also, since it so nicely reflects
mathematical notation. But I do think there's a place for (flip ($)) and
(flip (.)). The problem is that the assignment of fixities is much more
subtle and
Am Mittwoch, 23. November 2005 19:02 schrieb Fan Wu:
HI Wolfgang,
The code is from GHC source
ghc-6.4.1/libraries/monads/Monad/StateT.hs, am I looking at the wrong
place?
I found the thread discussing Monad strictness, where is your StateT
defined?
Hello Fan,
the GHC source is just where
On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 17:47 +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
. . .
Why is there no () and why is (=) not the default? The order of 'do
{a;b;c}' is compatible with that of (). So we have the fundamental
conflict, that usually function application is from right to left, but
interpreting
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 02:03:22AM -0700, Fan Wu wrote:
instance MonadPlus m = MonadPlus (StateT s m) where
mzero = lift mzero
mplus m1 m2 = do s - peek
let m1' = runState s m1
m2' = runState s m2
Hi Wolfgang,
Thanks for your response and examples! It helps a lot.
From your example I can see Lazy patterns are useful in contexts
where infinite data structures are being defined recursively (quote
section 4.4 of Gentle Introduction to Haskell). But does it apply to
the mplus case? I mean the
Wolfgang Jeltsch writes:
If we use an implementation of State *without lazy patterns*, it
becomes something like this:
\s - case next s of
(x,s') - case everyting s' of
(xs,s'') - ((x : xs),s'')
Note that I used case expressions to realize strict patterns
Folks this is a parser for Context Free Grammars, for some reason when
I go simplify the grammar trying to remove productions that substitute
variables like in the case:
S - A, A - B, B - a, it works perfectly and returns S -
a, the problem is when the root symbol is on the listthat must be
Hello Sebastian,
Wednesday, November 23, 2005, 6:46:54 PM, you wrote:
They work, even in a context switching regime, but I can't
exploit all the CPU's on my computer. Always is active
just one thread
SS Did you compile it with -threaded?
this will not help. multi-processing support will be
Bulat Ziganshin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They work, even in a context switching regime, but I can't
exploit all the CPU's on my computer. Always is active
just one thread
this will not help. multi-processing support will be added in GHC 6.6,
which must roll out due 6 months, as HCAR says
Keean Schupke writes:
HList can do O(log n) by the way, if the labels have order, you can
implement a binary search tree of labels (Of course all the accessor
functions would need to be rewritten).
The idea of writing a type-level balanced binary search tree fills me
with an uncertain mixture
On 23/11/05, Scherrer, Chad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Interesting note: in Richard Bird and Oege de Moor, _Algebra
of Programming_, pp. 2-3, the authors write
As a departure from tradition, we write f : A - B rather than
f : B - A to indicate
On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 21:21 -0500, Cale Gibbard wrote:
. . .
Hmm, which edition? My copy (5th ed.) uses the ordinary notation: f(x).
x f does perhaps make more sense, especially with the current
categorical view of functions, but there would have to be a really
hugely good reason to
Cale Gibbard:
x f does perhaps make more sense, especially with the current
categorical view of functions, but there would have to be a really
hugely good reason to change notation, as almost all current work puts
things the other way around.
Almost all?
Well, excluding the Smalltalkers,
On 24/11/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cale Gibbard:
x f does perhaps make more sense, especially with the current
categorical view of functions, but there would have to be a really
hugely good reason to change notation, as almost all current work puts
things the other
67 matches
Mail list logo
