Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Making Haskell more open
2005/11/13, Gour [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sven Panne ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: * DocBook XML can be transformed into a very rich collection of output formats: XHTML, HTML Help, DVI, PS, PDF, FO, plain text, etc. etc. txt2tags has the following backends: HTML, XHTML, SGML, LaTeX, Lout, man, Magic Point, Moin Moin, Page Maker 6.0 plain text. I don't see PDF and HtmlHelp backends here. Of course PDF can be created from LaTeX but this requires doble translation and you will need both txt2tags LaTeX installed. I spent some time to add support for HtmlHelp in haddock and I am using the HtmlHelp output from DocBook. I don't want to spend more time to learn a new markup and to make the things working with the new tools. I can't see real reasons to switch to new formats. Cheers, Krasimir ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Making Haskell more open
Sven Panne ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Great! If you have already an XML editor, start writing DocBook now! :-) No, I won't :-) More seriously: This is again a useless tools discussion, we *are* using DocBook currently and it works fine. The real problem is not the XML format and any XML toolchain, it is the lack of people willing to write documentation. Nobody said that DocBook does not work fine. However let me quote SPJ's message: quote However, I still wonder if there are things we could do that would make it easier for people to contribute. Here are two concrete suggestions: ^^^ - Make it possible for people to add comments, explanations, or questions to * The GHC user manual [currently generated using DocBook] * The Haskell 98 Report The idea would be that anyone could help improve these documents, ^^^ and that, at least in the case of the GHC user manual, we could use the comments to help clarify the text. /quote So, the whole discussion, at least from my side, was to offer suggestions to make it easier for more people to contribute to the whole haskell community. For those who are satisfied with the present setup or think that newsgroups are panacea forthe whole problem - fine. My reasoning tells me that Simon is thinking differently and therefore I suggested creating portal site with ticket system with the darcs backend, forums etc. so that new/old users can choose what is best suited for them. So, I wonder how 'txt2tags' produced so much traffic here and the tool uses (almost) the same markup as MoinMoin wiki used for the present HaWiki system (txt2tags even produces MoinMoin output :-) There are enough people in the various fptools projects (including me) who will happily and quickly accept documentation patches, be it in plain text or DocBook. And if we are honest: Whoever will contribute to the GHC/Happy/... documentation with a non-trivial amount of text has very probably suffered through the build process, anyway, and getting the XML tools up and running has been the least problem then... Following the same logic, we do not need darcs 'cause Whoever will contribute to the GHC/Happy/...with a non-trivial amount of.. code ..has very probably suffered through.. using CVS system :-) Thank you for your input. I think that I offered enough 'why' to my suggestion, so there is no need for further useless tools discussion ;) Sincerely, Gour P.S.: In a Google search, DocBook XML dominated txt2tags by a factor of 29, and an amazon.de search showed 7:0 books... :-) Hmmm, DocBook XML gives ~ 608 000, while txt2tags gives ~ 73 000 which gives factor of: ~8. otoh, LaTeX dominates over DocBook by a factor of ~ 38 :-)) -- Registered Linux User | #278493 GPG Public Key | 8C44EDCD ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Making Haskell more open
Am Sonntag, 13. November 2005 22:22 schrieb Gour: [...] But don't forget, as it was already stated, get the whole working-chain ready for authoring in Docbook is not at all ready and for one not proficient in emacs with SGML mode it is very difficult to write texts with so many tags. You should never use Emacs' SGML mode for authoring DocBook *XML*, nor should you use Emacs' ordinary XML mode. Use nXML, it's a lot better. [...] How many tags from DocBook DTD are actually used in GHC manual What's the problem if only a very little amount of tags is used in the GHC manual? This might be an argument *for* using DocBook. and how many of them are required for HTML output? I have to stress that HTML is not the only output format which should be supported. Sincerely, Gour Best wishes, Wolfgang ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Making Haskell more open
Gour wrote: Nobody said that DocBook does not work fine. However let me quote SPJ's message: quote However, I still wonder if there are things we could do that would make it easier for people to contribute. Here are two concrete suggestions: ^^^ - Make it possible for people to add comments, explanations, or questions to * The GHC user manual [currently generated using DocBook] * The Haskell 98 Report The idea would be that anyone could help improve these documents, ^^^ and that, at least in the case of the GHC user manual, we could use the comments to help clarify the text. /quote I think it would be ideal to provide the documentation on the web as now, but linking to wikified talk pages. Something like Wikipedia, (since MediaWiki was brought up) but perhaps with restricted write access to the feature pages, and public access to talk pages. The feature pages could easily(?) be kept in DocBook, if that makes it easier for producing printed copy etc. I don't know about the technical side, and my experience isn't all that wide, but I find I really like the look and feel of Wikipedia compared to other wikis. For those who are satisfied with the present setup or think that newsgroups are panacea forthe whole problem - fine. I think newsgroups are a good alternative/supplement to the mailing lists - that is, for discussion, just like IRC is a good forum for getting immediate help on various things. For documentation and more permanent information, something else is required. Following the same logic, we do not need darcs 'cause Whoever will contribute to the GHC/Happy/...with a non-trivial amount of.. code ..has very probably suffered through.. using CVS system :-) I would agree that the threshold needs to be as low as possible, if you want as many as possible to contribute. -k ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Making Haskell more open
Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote: Hmm, MediaWiki already supports the concept of discussion pages. Yes, I know. Perhaps I was less than lucid, so to clarify: But I doubt that it's a good thing to maintain DocBook sources via a wiki. I think it would be best to keep the documentation in DocBook and generate wiki pages from them, and collect user input in the talk pages and similar. Anything general and important could be back-integrated in the DocBook sources by somebody with more of an admin role. -k ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Making Haskell more open
On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 11:03 +0100, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote: Am Sonntag, 13. November 2005 22:05 schrieb Gour: [...] The question is if HTML is sufficient. In addition, HTML is at some points not well thought-out. True, but considering the present situation, it is all what is required. I doubt this. How, for example, do you implement code snippets which should be rendered in a paragraph of their own in HTML? I wrote a program (based on HsColour by Malcolm Wallace) which processes xhtml and modifies code.../code blocks to do simple Haskell syntax highlighting and link function names to corresponding haddock documentation (by reading .hi file to get the fully qualified names). http://haskell.org/gtk2hs/darcs/gtk2hs/docs/tools/AddLinks.hs http://haskell.org/gtk2hs/darcs/gtk2hs/docs/tutorial/Makefile I'm planning to use it for writing Gtk2Hs tutorials. http://haskell.org/~duncan/gtk2hs/HelloWorld.xhtml Duncan ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Making Haskell more open
Am Sonntag, 13. November 2005 22:05 schrieb Gour: [...] The question is if HTML is sufficient. In addition, HTML is at some points not well thought-out. True, but considering the present situation, it is all what is required. I doubt this. How, for example, do you implement code snippets which should be rendered in a paragraph of their own in HTML? Sincerely, Gour Best wishes, Wolfgang ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Making Haskell more open
Am Montag, 14. November 2005 10:49 schrieb Ketil Malde: [...] I think it would be ideal to provide the documentation on the web as now, but linking to wikified talk pages. Something like Wikipedia, (since MediaWiki was brought up) but perhaps with restricted write access to the feature pages, and public access to talk pages. The feature pages could easily(?) be kept in DocBook, if that makes it easier for producing printed copy etc. I don't know about the technical side, and my experience isn't all that wide, but I find I really like the look and feel of Wikipedia compared to other wikis. Hmm, MediaWiki already supports the concept of discussion pages. But I doubt that it's a good thing to maintain DocBook sources via a wiki. One reason is that you might get into conflicts with wiki syntax. Perhaps a darcs repository would be more appropriate here? But in general I kind of like the wiki approach. Maybe not for everything (for instance, not for the GHC documentation's DocBook sources) but for most of what's currently the Haskell website. [...] -k Best wishes, Wolfgang ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Download binary file
Hi everyone, I'm trying to download a binary file (an mp3) from a given URL, at the moment I've found two possible solutions: 1) Use the Network.Socket library from ghc to get the file. The problem with this is that I'll have to deal with the HTTP protocol (done), and read the Handle in binary mode however I don't understand how to do this, in particular how to deal with the buffer (Prt?). 2) Use a system program like wget in linux systems. But I don't know how to call a system command from haskell, and besides I wan't my program to be portable at least between windows and linux. Any sugestions? Sorry for my newbie question. Thanks. -- Jorge E. Guerra D. Departamento de Computación y Tecnología de la Información Universidad Simón Bolívar ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] warning HEAP: creating uncommited range
Folks, Does this ring a bell with anyone? logon.exe is a binary that I built with -O -debug and ran from within gdb on Windows. warning HEAP:[logon.exe] warning: Failing creating uncommitted range (7fbfc000 for 5000) Thanks, Joel -- http://wagerlabs.com/ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Two questions: lazy evaluation and Church-Rosser
This is surely a dumb question, but where can I find a proof of the Church-Rosser theorem? Now, a totally(?) separate question: I've been trying to do some background reading on lambda calculus, and have found discussions of strict evaluation strategies (call-by-value and call-by-name) but have yet to find an appropriate framework for modeling lazy evaluation (much less infinite lists and comprehensions). Can anyone point me in the right direction? === Gregory Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nothing is as powerful than an idea whose time has come. -- Victor Hugo ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Semantics for FP?
First of all, I'm very new to Haskell (but very impressed). I remember having a lot of fun with Lisp as an undergrad, and recently started working with Scheme (and having a great time at it), and so I decided to look into Haskell. Like everyone else, I was totally impressed by the two line quicksort -- and hooked. Unfortunately(?), though, FP seems to pose a bit of a challenge from a semantic point of view. I remember being very impressed with Dynamic Logic (Harel et al.), and it really changed my way of thinking about programming languages. But are Kripke structures even of any relevance to Haskell and FP? Well, in order to think it through, I've been experimenting with the idea of reduction providing the basic accessibility relation. That's why I've been asking seemingly off-topic questions about lambda calculus and C-R (well- definedness). === Gregory Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking. -- Albert Einstein ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
