On 11/04/2014 05:32 AM, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
The ; match-required part is optional, and the match-provided part might
be empty. So P1 and P2 would look like this:
pattern P1 :: forall a. (; Num a) = b - (a,b)
pattern P2 :: forall a. (; Num a, Ord a) = a - a
How about marking the
There are good reasons not to require people's real name to participate:
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Real_Names%22_policy%3F
Simon PJ often advocates to know people's name as part of creating a
friendly community. There are good things about this. It also helps
On 10/07/2014 02:32 AM, p.k.f.holzensp...@utwente.nl wrote:
But that would only work on 64 bit systems, right?
Yes, this approach to a parallel GHC would only work on 64-bit machines.
The idea is, I guess, that we're not going to see a massive demand for
parallel GHC running on multi-core
On 07/10/2014 02:34 PM, Gabor Greif wrote:
Jan, this is great! Thanks for attacking this issue.
Regarding result, I do not like the idea to introduce arbitrary
words with special meanings. What if somebody writes
injective type family F a result c | result - a result c
it will be
I've been wondering whether there are any cases where the ability to
coerce a parameter should not be exported (as for Set) but where the
implementation would like to use some coercions (for example, if it
internally wanted to coerce the contained type to a specific newtype, to
change some of
On 01/14/2014 11:48 AM, Sven Panne wrote:
My point was: As much as I propose to keep these current semantics,
there might be users who care more about performance than
IEEE-754-conformance.
Adding a -ffast-math flag could be fine IMHO.
For those, relatively simple semantics could be:
On 01/13/2014 05:21 PM, Kyle Van Berendonck wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to work on the primitives first. They are relatively easy to
implement. Here's how I figure it;
The internal representation of the floats in the cmm is as a Rational
(ratio of Integers), so they have infinite precision. I can
Tom Stellard is leading an effort to make dot releases for LLVM 3.3 [*];
perhaps LLVM folks could be convinced to fix the issues in a 3.3.1 release.
-Isaac (just happens to be on both email lists and doesn't know anything
more than this)
[*]
On 04/03/2013 02:06 PM, Gabor Greif wrote:
Now that Constraint kinds are pretty much into the mainstream, can we
consider the '!' annotation in data declarations as a magic
constraint? Not unlike NFData, but only ensuring that said value is in
WHNF.
So the following definitions would be
On 03/18/2013 12:55 PM, Duncan Coutts wrote:
[...] it
is not simply the outline parser for cabal-style files that we're
talking about. We also need parsers/pretty printers for all the various
little types that make up the info about packages, like versions,
package names, package ids, version
On 02/14/2013 10:10 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| Finally I managed to build again (don't know what's wrong with my
| system, I built on a virtual machine instead now), and the tests pass. I
| attached the four patches, they were created with git diff --no-prefix,
| and their name specifies
11 matches
Mail list logo
