ghc-5.03 release candidate installer available (win32)

In preparation for a ghc-5.03 snapshot release, a test installer for Win32 platforms is now available: http://www.galois.com/~sof/ghc-503.msi (*) Size: 25.1 Mb. Please let me know if you run into any problems with it. thanks, --sigbjorn btw, Mike Thomas deserves a special mention for

GHC version 5.02.2 is available

The (Interactive) Glasgow Haskell Compiler -- version 5.02.2 == We are pleased to announce a new patchlevel release of the Glasgow Haskell Compiler (GHC), version 5.02.2. The source distribution is freely available via the

Three new lectureships in Nottingham

Dear all, We are currently advertising three new lectureships in Nottingham. There are no particular research areas specified for these positions, but applications in the area of the Foundations of Programming research group (http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/Research/fop/) would be most welcome.

GHC version 5.02.2 is available

The (Interactive) Glasgow Haskell Compiler -- version 5.02.2 == We are pleased to announce a new patchlevel release of the Glasgow Haskell Compiler (GHC), version 5.02.2. The source distribution is freely available via the

Call for Papers: 7th ERCIM FMICS (Malaga, Spain) July 12-13, 2002

[ Apologies for multiple copies ] ** * * --- CALL FOR PAPERS --- * * 7th International Workshop on Formal Methods for Industrial Critical Systems * (FMICS 02) *

A Haskell specific preprocessor

I faintly remember that there was once work on a Haskell specific preprocessor. Why was the work abandoned? cpp just annoyed me again. I wrote (/*) = something and cpp complained Test.hs:4: unterminated comment Ciao, Olaf -- OLAF CHITIL, Dept. of Computer Science, The University of

Programming style question

Hello, Here's something I've always wanted to know but have never dared ask until now (it seems so basic). If I have defined a function like this.. f args = blah args it could be re-written.. f = blah I had always assumed the internal representation of these 2 definitions would

Re: Programming style question

The only semantic difference is in the type checker - the first form is not subject to monomorphism while the latter is unless a type signature is present. There should be no difference at all in the generated code. John ___ Haskell mailing list

Re: A Haskell specific preprocessor

-C option cure it... (that was hugs, wasn't it? I added -Fcpp_hugs to HUGSFLAGS, where cpp_hugs is script which wraps cpp. See the attachment.) Haskell (with syntactic sugar rules) is quiet good itself. Cpp is mostly used for #if portability triggers, and it's good for the purpose. C-specific

RE: Programming style question

Hi Adrian, | If I have defined a function like this.. | f args = blah args | it could be re-written.. | f = blah | | I had always assumed the internal representation of | these 2 definitions would be identical (and should | yield identical code), but it appears that isn't so | (with