On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 05:28:22PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Both of these messages (from Neil and Serge) suggest use debugging ideas.
Would anyone like to add them to
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Debugging
[..]
How can I put it there? It needs login.
I do not know,
On 2006-11-14 at 13:57+0300 Serge D. Mechveliani wrote:
Thanks to people who discussed the question of
who said `fromJust Nothing' and -xc option.
My last impression is that instead of using -xc it is better to write
programs in a debug-friendly style. For example, let g x must
Thanks to people who discussed the question of
who said `fromJust Nothing' and -xc option.
My last impression is that instead of using -xc it is better to write
programs in a debug-friendly style. For example, let g x must
return (Just _), but the programmer is not 100% sure that g x
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 12:08:07PM +, Jon Fairbairn wrote:
[..]
My last impression is that instead of using -xc it is better to write
programs in a debug-friendly style. For example, let g x must
return (Just _), but the programmer is not 100% sure that g x is free
of bugs.
Hi
My last impression is that instead of using -xc it is better to write
programs in a debug-friendly style. For example, let g x must
return (Just _), but the programmer is not 100% sure that g x is free
of bugs. Then, instead of
f x = h $ fromJust $ g x
one
Both of these messages (from Neil and Serge) suggest use debugging ideas.
Would anyone like to add them to
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Debugging
Simon
| Use a safe module:
| http://neilmitchell.blogspot.com/2006/11/library-idea-safe-library.html
| - always works, a little bit of
ndmitchell:
Hi
My last impression is that instead of using -xc it is better to write
programs in a debug-friendly style. For example, let g x must
return (Just _), but the programmer is not 100% sure that g x is free
of bugs. Then, instead of
f x = h $
