My main comment is that this would be really valuable if you kept
expanding out the last part (Section 7) so that it was a tree of `M`s
and then show how `runEffect` collapsed those `M`s into a single `IO`
action.
I did something very similar for my Stanford pipes lecture and it went
over really well. People *really* like seeing the syntax trees that
pipes expand out to and understanding how the composition operators fuse
the syntax trees together.
You can check out the first section of the slides, which you can find here:
http://www.scs.stanford.edu/14sp-cs240h/slides/pipes-slides.html#%281%29
You'll see that I did something very similar, except for a
`Producer`-only subset of `pipes`. Once people understand how the `do`
notation translates to syntax trees they usually "get it".
On 5/23/14, 3:33 PM, Chris Mahon wrote:
That's an error - thx for letting me know - should be:
yield 1 >> yield 2, etc.
I have updated the article.
On Saturday, May 24, 2014 7:59:56 AM UTC+10, Pierre R wrote:
Are you sure this part is correct (the 1 becomes 2, ...) ?
|yield :: Monad m => a -> Proxy x' x a' a m a'
yield a = Respond a Pure
producer'' :: Proxy X () () Int IO ()
producer''
= yield 1 >> yield 1
= yield 1 >>= \_ -> yield 1
= Respond 1 Pure >>= \_ -> Respond 1 Pure
= Respond 1 (\v -> Pure v >>= \_ -> Respond 2 Pure)
= Respond 1 (\v -> Pure v >>= \_ -> Respond 2 (\v' -> Pure v'))
|
Cheers
On Friday, May 23, 2014 4:35:12 AM UTC+2, Chris Mahon wrote:
I completed the unfinished parts of the article, mainly the
reduction of the sample effect at the end. Will update with
any feedback. thx, Chris
On Thursday, May 22, 2014 8:21:32 AM UTC+10, Gabriel Gonzalez
wrote:
Alright, then I will try to complete the bidirectional
tutorial as soon as possible.
On 5/21/14, 7:13 AM, Chris Mahon wrote:
Thanks for those links, very interesting. I'll shelve
that idea for a bi-directional article then - look
forward to your tutorial on the subject - I'm not sure I
would have had much to write on the subject anyway.
On Wednesday, May 21, 2014 11:12:09 PM UTC+10, Gabriel
Gonzalez wrote:
I'm still reading your article, and I will give more
comments later today, but I just wanted to mention
that there used to be a bidirectional pipes tutorial
back in the 3.* cycle:
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/pipes-3.3.0/docs/Control-Proxy-Tutorial.html#g:2
<https://hackage.haskell.org/package/pipes-3.3.0/docs/Control-Proxy-Tutorial.html#g:2>
I deleted in the transition to 4.0.0, mainly because
people were complaining about the high complexity of
`pipes` and one of the goals of the 4.0.0 release was
to show that you could program entirely in a
unidirectional subset of `pipes`. However, I plan to
add a bidirectional tutorial back again soon.
You might also find this Stack Overflow answer I
wrote helpful:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23185690/event-handler-stack/23187159#23187159
<http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23185690/event-handler-stack/23187159#23187159>
On 5/21/14, 4:38 AM, Chris Mahon wrote:
Hi all,
I'm working on an article titled pipes deconstructed
<http://cmahon.github.io/posts/pipes-deconstructed/>
and would really appreciate feedback before I put
the final touches on it. My aim is to explain the
underlying co-routine mechanics via a reduction of a
simple example to Proxy form. While I found it
useful to get to grips with the pipes implementation
for my own edification, I'm really not sure whether
anyone else would find this level of detail useful
so apart from any comments on style, correctness,
etc., please let me know if I'm off on a
self-indulgent tangent of no wider interest!
Was also thinking of writing a short article
illustrating bi-directional pipes usage as I
couldn't find much detail on the subject in the
pipes tutorial and I leaned how to send data
upstream while digging into the pipes code. Simple
example towards the end of a short note I just wrote
on fix. <http://cmahon.github.io/notes/haskell/#fix>
I've just created my blog and the limited content
that's there is all work in progress at the moment
so a bit rough and ready in places.
Anyway, thanks in advance for your help,
Chris
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
to the Google Groups "Haskell Pipes" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
emails from it, send an email to
[email protected].
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected].
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups "Haskell Pipes" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it, send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected].
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Haskell Pipes" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haskell
Pipes" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
