Re: Unit unboxed tuples

2012-01-10 Thread Simon Marlow
On 09/01/2012 04:46, wren ng thornton wrote: On 12/23/11 8:34 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: More uniform! If you the singleton-unboxed-tuple data constructor in source code, as a function, you'd write (\x - (# x #)). In a pattern, or applied, you'd write (# x #). Shouldn't (# T #) be

Re: Unregistered builds broken?

2012-01-10 Thread Joachim Breitner
Dear GHC team (esp. Simon and Ian), thanks for fixing the exotic-architecture-build-errors in time for 7.4.1, everything compiles smoothly now: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ghcsuite=experimental (Well, arm* and mips* are not done yet, as they need more than one day, but the

More primops for integer arithmetic with overflow reporting

2012-01-10 Thread Herbert Valerio Riedel
Hello GHC HQ, As the {Int,Word}{,8,16,32,64} types in Haskell are usually regarded to follow modulo arithmetic (w.r.t. to the Num-class ops), I was trying to implement efficient non-modulo Safe{Int,Word}{,8,16,32,64} types which would throw exceptions when the result falls outside the value

Re: More primops for integer arithmetic with overflow reporting

2012-01-10 Thread Ian Lynagh
Hi hvr, On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:05:51PM +0100, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote: As the {Int,Word}{,8,16,32,64} types in Haskell are usually regarded to follow modulo arithmetic (w.r.t. to the Num-class ops), I was trying to implement efficient non-modulo Safe{Int,Word}{,8,16,32,64} types

Re: Unregistered builds broken?

2012-01-10 Thread Simon Marlow
On 10/01/2012 10:58, Joachim Breitner wrote: Dear GHC team (esp. Simon and Ian), thanks for fixing the exotic-architecture-build-errors in time for 7.4.1, everything compiles smoothly now: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ghcsuite=experimental (Well, arm* and mips* are not done

Re: Unit unboxed tuples

2012-01-10 Thread Tyson Whitehead
On January 8, 2012 23:49:47 wren ng thornton wrote: An alternative is to distinguish, say, (# x #) and its spaceful constructor (# #) from the spaceless (##); and analogously for the boxed tuples, though that introduces confusion about parentheses for boxing vs parentheses for grouping. I

Re: Unit unboxed tuples

2012-01-10 Thread Dan Doel
Copying the list, sorry. I have a lot of trouble replying correctly with gmail's interface for some reason. :) On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Dan Doel dan.d...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 5:01 AM, Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com wrote: On 09/01/2012 04:46, wren ng thornton

Re: Unit unboxed tuples

2012-01-10 Thread wren ng thornton
On 1/10/12 10:31 AM, Tyson Whitehead wrote: On January 8, 2012 23:49:47 wren ng thornton wrote: An alternative is to distinguish, say, (# x #) and its spaceful constructor (# #) from the spaceless (##); and analogously for the boxed tuples, though that introduces confusion about parentheses for

kinds for `*'

2012-01-10 Thread Serge D. Mechveliani
People, GHC provides some extensions for kinds. Does this make possible different kinds, for example, for `*' ? Prelude.Num has * :: a - a - a. And mathematicians also like to denote as `*' (\cdot in TeX) a multiplication of a vector v by a coefficient r. It is expressed by the declaration

Re: Records in Haskell

2012-01-10 Thread Isaac Dupree
On 01/10/2012 05:06 AM, Greg Weber wrote: Some of your comments seem to not fully recognize the name-spacing (plus simple type resolution) aspect of this proposal that I probably didn't explain well enough. Or maybe I don't understand your comments. For record.field, field is under the record's