On Nov 7, 2007 10:00 AM, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 07 November 2007 05:21, hlovatt wrote:
Therefore multiple dispatch provides the best of both worlds...
No one seems to have replied, so I thought I would. IANAExpert
disclaimers here. :-) Hopefully this will inspire
On Nov 10, 2007 1:33 PM, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 10 November 2007 04:33, hlovatt wrote:
public interface Exp extends MultipleDispatch { Exp d( Var x ); }
public abstract class AbstractExp implements Exp {
public final Exp d( Var x ) { return null; } // Body
On Nov 11, 2007 3:34 PM, David MacIver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Per-function type annotations are considered good practice in Haskell
because
it has an undecideable type system but not in ML, where you generally see no
type annotations whatsoever.
Haskell's core type system isn't
with Scala than with Java.
On 11/30/07, David MacIver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For what it's worth, the obvious Java translation does the same thing:
class Foo{
public static void main(String[] args){
long bits = 0L;
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
int n
Surely it's no news that Java is competitive with C for pure numeric
operations.
On Dec 1, 2007 11:02 AM, Neil Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scala faster than C post to reddit, anyone? ;-)
On 1 Dec 2007, at 10:53, David MacIver wrote:
More interesting data points:
On a 64-bit
body is practically empty. :-) It's just the end result of a few
simple throwing away uneccessary work optimisations, nothing magic.
On Dec 1, 2007 1:13 AM, David MacIver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For what it's worth, the obvious Java translation does the same thing:
class Foo{
public static
On Dec 1, 2007 4:17 PM, Richard Warburton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On a 64-bit machine running linux there's no difference between the
client and server times. I don't know whether this is because the
64-bit client and server VM optimisations aren't as different as they
are in 32-bit
On Dec 17, 2007 4:00 AM, hlovatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure, Scala has Traits. But the twist I am interested in is the
ability to modify the interface and not have to recompile the classes
that implement them.
Re. delegation. I already do this for multiple dispatch (https://
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 24 April 2008 21:39:56 Daniel Green wrote:
It seems that everyone has put Scala in their top 5 :-). So either we
were all introduced to the this group through the Scala community, or
we're in for some
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 25 April 2008 12:08:25 David MacIver wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:49 AM, easieste [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
And I would put 'Fortress' up there, but I don't know if Sun has
released easily
2009/4/3 Jon Harrop j...@ffconsultancy.com:
On Friday 03 April 2009 14:18:32 Robert Fischer wrote:
Jon Harrop wrote:
The state of the art in all of the major functional languages for the
JVM (Scala and Clojure) is that they die with a stack overflow because
the JVM lacks tail calls. :-)
On 19 November 2010 04:04, Charles Oliver Nutter head...@headius.com wrote:
we have introduced subtle bugs over the years, such as when a channel
we don't own enters Ruby, we wrap it, and then our finalization closes
it prematurely.
One solution you could use here is to use a weak reference on
12 matches
Mail list logo
