The support libraries for HaskellDirect provide
functions for converting between BSTRs and Haskell'
String (Com.marshallBSTR, Com.unmarshallBSTR) --
http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/fp/software/hdirect/user-32.html
has the overview. However, the binaries available for
that library is for ghc-4.045, so
Ralf Muschall writes:
simplistic, binary distinction), then you have to decide where to draw the
line between "functional languages" and other languages that may, to some
I think it became impossible to draw that line since the inventors
and maintainers of dysfunctional langauges
Hi,
I wonder if anybody has ever tried to develop a good compiler for Haskell
or any other functional language for a DSP processor?
There are no good C compilers for DSPs and much of DSP programming is still
done in assembler, due to the irregularity of DSP instruction sets and the
peculiarity
Hello,
I knew one relevant link for functional DSP:
http://users.snip.net/~donadio/mpd-hs-dsp.html
Kwanghoon
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Axel Jantsch wrote:
Hi,
I wonder if anybody has ever tried to develop a good compiler for Haskell
or any other functional language for a DSP processor?
Hi,
For DSP with Haskell, I remember having seen 2 years ago a presentation by
James Hook (Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology, Pacific
Software Research) on Hawk, which should be a Haskell derivative.
http://www.cse.ogi.edu/PacSoft/ should be a starting point
Hope it is
If C# again makes it easy to write unsafe code, then in order
to avoid the learning curve, many current C/C++ programmers
are likely to continue programming in The Old Way. The trick
lies in the learning curve.
I think you are mistakening ignorance for stupidity. It is true that
Doug Ransom wrote:
I think you are mistakening ignorance for stupidity. It
is true that C/C++ programmers like to write OO and few
have any idea about functional programming, but very few
will miss the ability to constantly shoot themselves in
the foot with uninitalized random pointers,
