Re: [Haskell-cafe] Some thoughts on Type-Directed Name
There is an effort underway to make Haskell's Records better. The discussion is ongoing on the ghc-users mail list, ... in the direction of making the most minimal changes possible to achieve some simple record name-spacing. Thanks, Greg Weber Thank you Greg, Yes I know, and I have been trying to follow along (intermittently). Thank you for your attempts to marshall the discussion. What would really, really help me is for someone to have a look at the 'solution' I posted to the difficulties SPJ saw with the SORF approach. (I ref'd it in my reply to Steve.) It seemed from my testing to address the needs. Since I got it working in GHC 7.2.1, there's a good chance it will need only minimal changes to implement (I'm thinking mostly syntactic sugar) -- providing of course that it is workable and generalisable enough. It could possibly benefit from some of the new Kind-level stuff in 7.4.1 (that SPJ used, but wasn't available to me at the time). I keep trying to make the time to write up the full proposal on the Wiki. I see it as a 'tweak' to SORF. Given that I'm supposed to have a day job, I'm reluctant to make time until/unless someone else double-checks whether I'm barking up the wrong tree. Anthony ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: Records in Haskell
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 8:02 PM, AntC anthony_clay...@clear.net.nz wrote: Ryan Newton rrnewton at gmail.com writes: I admit I'm a big fan of polymorphic extension. But I don't love it enough for it to impede progress! Records proposals for Haskell have repeatedly foundered on the rocks of extensibility. Meanwhile, it seems like years of experience with field extensibility in OO languages has shown that it's not an especially good idea, with authors on programming practice militating for information hiding instead. I don't think it's worth treading that path yet again in Haskell. -Jan Jan, I agree we shouldn't try leaping forward to extensibility yet. I disagree that we should abandon any thoughts of it and produce a stopgap approach for records that won't ever be extensible. The 'proof of concept' I posted to the list last month http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2011-December/021298.html already includes get and set over polymorphic records and polymorphic fields, I believe, which is half way there. I love Haskell for the way it learns from well-structured mathematical approaches -- in the way I feel OO doesn't. There is a well-structured mathematically sound approach for extensibility, as it happens. It dates back to 1969. It is the 'engine' behind large-scale programming systems all over the world every day. I do and have worked with a lot of them. It's called Relational Algebra, it's based on set theory, it's declarative - which should fit smoothly with Haskell. It has an operation to extend records called 'extend' (!). It has an operation to merge records called 'join'. It has an operation to concatenate records called 'cross-product' You'll probably know it by its 'awkward cousin' SQL. There are many reasons for hating SQL, and there are many reasons why it's a bad fit to OO -- especially because SQL is declarative. There are many reasons to go back to the better-founded mathematical basis that pre-dates SQL. AntC ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Fwd: [Gtk2hs-users] GHC 7.4+ rts_evalIO
Dear ghc developers, there seems to be a change in the C functions of ghc. How do we fix this? Is there some guide as to what has changed? Thanks, Axel Begin forwarded message: From: Andriy Polishchuk andriy.s.polishc...@gmail.com Date: 27. Januar 2012 03:36:50 MEZ To: gtk2hs-us...@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Gtk2hs-users] GHC 7.4+ rts_evalIO Hello, I'm newbie in haskell, so didn't got success bumping package manually. With new GHC gtk does not build with the following error: System\Glib\hsgclosure.c:110:5: warning: passing argument 1 of 'rts_evalIO' from incompatible pointer type S:\prog\lang.haskell\ghc\lib/include/RtsAPI.h:202:6: note: expected 'struct Capability **' but argument is of type 'str ct Capability *' Are there any simple workarounds or it's hard stuff and it's better for me to wait new release? The reason I want to hack with new GHC is that on windows there is fixed bug with ghci that doesn't allow to interactively link related libraries. -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2___ Gtk2hs-users mailing list gtk2hs-us...@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gtk2hs-users ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: [Gtk2hs-users] GHC 7.4+ rts_evalIO
Axel, See my recent email to gtk2hs-users, I already proposed a fix for this. 28.01.2012, в 17:36, Axel Simon axel.si...@in.tum.de написал(а): Dear ghc developers, there seems to be a change in the C functions of ghc. How do we fix this? Is there some guide as to what has changed? Thanks, Axel Begin forwarded message: From: Andriy Polishchuk andriy.s.polishc...@gmail.com Date: 27. Januar 2012 03:36:50 MEZ To: gtk2hs-us...@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Gtk2hs-users] GHC 7.4+ rts_evalIO Hello, I'm newbie in haskell, so didn't got success bumping package manually. With new GHC gtk does not build with the following error: System\Glib\hsgclosure.c:110:5: warning: passing argument 1 of 'rts_evalIO' from incompatible pointer type S:\prog\lang.haskell\ghc\lib/include/RtsAPI.h:202:6: note: expected 'struct Capability **' but argument is of type 'str ct Capability *' Are there any simple workarounds or it's hard stuff and it's better for me to wait new release? The reason I want to hack with new GHC is that on windows there is fixed bug with ghci that doesn't allow to interactively link related libraries. -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2___ Gtk2hs-users mailing list gtk2hs-us...@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gtk2hs-users ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 08:57:35PM -0800, Evan Laforge wrote: Unfortunately ghci still segfaults for me most times (the previous release candidate did too). Anyone else seeing this? What should I do to troubleshoot? OS X 10.6.8, using GHC-7.4.0.20120126-x86_64.pkg Ah, sorry, I should have said: The OS X installer (and the bindist) is known to work on OS X 10.7.2 with Xcode 4.1, and will not work with some older versions (I don't know if it's older versions of OS X or of XCode that cause problems). If you build GHC yourself on an older version, then the result should work. Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:10:26PM -0600, Austin Seipp wrote: Ian, can I ask what the procedure would be to check out the 7.4 branch of GHC and all the associated libraries to try this out? I'm not familiar with all the `sync-all`-fu, but I speculate it's what'll do it. :) See http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Building/GettingTheSources#Gettingabranch with branch-name being ghc-7.4 Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: [Gtk2hs-users] GHC 7.4+ rts_evalIO
Oh, ok, sorry, I didn't realize this was the same issue. Please ignore this email then. Axel On 28.01.2012, at 14:40, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: Axel, See my recent email to gtk2hs-users, I already proposed a fix for this. 28.01.2012, в 17:36, Axel Simon axel.si...@in.tum.de написал(а): Dear ghc developers, there seems to be a change in the C functions of ghc. How do we fix this? Is there some guide as to what has changed? Thanks, Axel Begin forwarded message: From: Andriy Polishchuk andriy.s.polishc...@gmail.com Date: 27. Januar 2012 03:36:50 MEZ To: gtk2hs-us...@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Gtk2hs-users] GHC 7.4+ rts_evalIO Hello, I'm newbie in haskell, so didn't got success bumping package manually. With new GHC gtk does not build with the following error: System\Glib\hsgclosure.c:110:5: warning: passing argument 1 of 'rts_evalIO' from incompatible pointer type S:\prog\lang.haskell\ghc\lib/include/RtsAPI.h:202:6: note: expected 'struct Capability **' but argument is of type 'str ct Capability *' Are there any simple workarounds or it's hard stuff and it's better for me to wait new release? The reason I want to hack with new GHC is that on windows there is fixed bug with ghci that doesn't allow to interactively link related libraries. -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2___ Gtk2hs-users mailing list gtk2hs-us...@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gtk2hs-users ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
I installed it on my mac (OS X 10.7.2, XCode 4.1) without any issues (using bindist, not pkg). Is upgrading to XCode 4.2 ok from GHC perspective (more specifically, runtime performance of code compiled by GHC)? I have seen some discussion of Clang causing issues for GHC, but it was about compiling GHC RTS using gcc instead of llvm-gcc. XCode 4.2 has only llvm-gcc, it seems. But, as long as I use GHC bindist, that shouldn't matter. The reason I am asking is I want to try LLVM backend but GHC keeps complaining about missing llvm tools (opt, llc). I checked LLVM webpage but couldn't find information about how to determine what llvm tools are installed on my Mac. My guess is XCode 4.1 comes with llvm backend for GCC, but not standalone LLVM tools that GHC needs, and that upgrading to XCode 4.2 would give me LLVM 3.0 tools as well. Please correct me if I got it wrong. On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Ian Lynagh ig...@earth.li wrote: On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 08:57:35PM -0800, Evan Laforge wrote: Unfortunately ghci still segfaults for me most times (the previous release candidate did too). Anyone else seeing this? What should I do to troubleshoot? OS X 10.6.8, using GHC-7.4.0.20120126-x86_64.pkg Ah, sorry, I should have said: The OS X installer (and the bindist) is known to work on OS X 10.7.2 with Xcode 4.1, and will not work with some older versions (I don't know if it's older versions of OS X or of XCode that cause problems). If you build GHC yourself on an older version, then the result should work. Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Sanket Agrawal sanket.agra...@gmail.com wrote: The reason I am asking is I want to try LLVM backend but GHC keeps complaining about missing llvm tools (opt, llc). I checked LLVM webpage but couldn't find information about how to determine what llvm tools are installed on my Mac. My guess is XCode 4.1 comes with llvm backend for GCC, but not standalone LLVM tools that GHC needs, and that upgrading to XCode 4.2 would give me LLVM 3.0 tools as well. Please correct me if I got it wrong. I just downloaded the LLVM binaries and put them somewhere on my PATH. -- Johan ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.comwrote: On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Sanket Agrawal sanket.agra...@gmail.com wrote: The reason I am asking is I want to try LLVM backend but GHC keeps complaining about missing llvm tools (opt, llc). I checked LLVM webpage but couldn't find information about how to determine what llvm tools are installed on my Mac. My guess is XCode 4.1 comes with llvm backend for GCC, but not standalone LLVM tools that GHC needs, and that upgrading to XCode 4.2 would give me LLVM 3.0 tools as well. Please correct me if I got it wrong. I just downloaded the LLVM binaries and put them somewhere on my PATH. Yes, that is another possibility. I would like to keep it simple, and just upgrade to XCode 4.2, instead of installing Clang+LLVM binaries separately, if it is not an issue for GHC. ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 09:52:13AM -0500, Sanket Agrawal wrote: I installed it on my mac (OS X 10.7.2, XCode 4.1) without any issues (using bindist, not pkg). Is upgrading to XCode 4.2 ok from GHC perspective There is a problem with the LLVM gcc and GHC: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/5810 I don't know if it is only a problem when compiling the RTS. Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:15:46PM +, Ian Lynagh wrote: We are pleased to announce the first release candidate for GHC 7.4.1: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/7.4.1-rc2/ The first candidate or the second? (for the date is Jan 27). Is ghc-7.4.0.20111219 the first candidate? Also people already reported a couple of bugs for 7.4.1-rc2/. So, is there going to be the third candidate? If not, then I'll, probably, have to test this second candidate (if it is second). Regards, -- Sergei mech...@botik.ru ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
On Jan 28, 2012 11:14 AM, Sanket Agrawal sanket.agra...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, that is another possibility. I would like to keep it simple, and just upgrade to XCode 4.2, instead of installing Clang+LLVM binaries separately, if it is not an issue for GHC. Xcode 4.2 doesn't include full LLVM either; moreover, what it does have is an llvm3 prerelease that apparently doesn't work with -fllvm. -- ...tabula non rasa (brandon s allbery kf8nh on the padd) ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 08:32:31PM +0400, Serge D. Mechveliani wrote: On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:15:46PM +, Ian Lynagh wrote: We are pleased to announce the first release candidate for GHC 7.4.1: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/7.4.1-rc2/ The first candidate or the second? Sorry, copy-and-paste error. This is the second release candidate. (for the date is Jan 27). Is ghc-7.4.0.20111219 the first candidate? Yes. Also people already reported a couple of bugs for 7.4.1-rc2/. So, is there going to be the third candidate? That's very unlikely. If not, then I'll, probably, have to test this second candidate That would be great, thanks! Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC 7.4.1 Release Candidate 2
Ian, Thanks for pointing this out. I run XCode 4 (and haven't had the opportunity to upgrade.) Would it be reasonable to make a binary distribution for people like Evan and Me and hopefully have it put on the download page? I presume the people in our boat are actually pretty small in number (OS X users are fairly keen to upgrade pretty quickly,) but it would be nice to not have to build it ourselves if that's the case. On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Ian Lynagh ig...@earth.li wrote: On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 08:57:35PM -0800, Evan Laforge wrote: Unfortunately ghci still segfaults for me most times (the previous release candidate did too). Anyone else seeing this? What should I do to troubleshoot? OS X 10.6.8, using GHC-7.4.0.20120126-x86_64.pkg Ah, sorry, I should have said: The OS X installer (and the bindist) is known to work on OS X 10.7.2 with Xcode 4.1, and will not work with some older versions (I don't know if it's older versions of OS X or of XCode that cause problems). If you build GHC yourself on an older version, then the result should work. Thanks Ian ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users -- Regards, Austin ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
