On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 21:01:57 +0100
Graham Klyne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm convinced I've seen a function like this somewhere:
>[a->b] -> a -> [b]
> but cannot remember where. Or maybe:
>Monad m => m (a->b) -> a -> m b
> ?
>
> I could roll my own (*), but I'm trying not to duplicat
I'm convinced I've seen a function like this somewhere:
[a->b] -> a -> [b]
but cannot remember where. Or maybe:
Monad m => m (a->b) -> a -> m b
?
I could roll my own (*), but I'm trying not to duplicate standard library
functions is I can help it. Any pointers?
#g
--
(*)
flist :: [a->b
ICFP Programming Contest
There are just ten days to go to the sixth ICFP Programming Contest!
Starting at midnight on Saturday morning, June 28th, you can prove
once again that your favourite programming language is "the
programming tool of choice for discriminating hacker
> Does this also mean that a dictionary class is created for every class, and
> a dictionary created for every instance?
Yes, exactly. Every class is translated to a data type declaration,
and every instance is translated to an element of that data type - a
dictionary. (Note that you can't act
Bayley, Alistair wrote:
When it's applied, the compiler will know the types of the arguments, won't
it?. Which means that you would generate a version of double for each
(applied) instance of Num. I don't doubt that there's a good reason this is
not done: code bloat? or are there simply some expres
> > Is there
> > some way of preventing the type mechanism from generating
> code for the
> > instance type, as opposed to the class?
>
> I don't understand this question - does the explanation above help?
I could have been clearer with my questions. What I was wondering was: is
there some sit
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:07:06 +0100
Alastair Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 June 2003 2:33 am, Abraham Egnor wrote:
> > I'd like to make a haskell binding for a C++ library. Most of the
> > tools out there seem oriented towards c bindings, so it looks like
> > I'll be writing the
Dear Abraham,
> Now comes the question of how to map a C++ class hierarchy
> into haskell.
> It seems natural to try to map C++ classes into haskell typeclasses;
> however, there are a few issues involved with that.
You will quickly run into problems when doing that. The most
important probl
Alistair Bayley writes:
> Warning: Defaulting the following constraint(s) to type `Integer'
>`Num a' arising from the literal `2' at Main.lhs:3
>
> This implies to me that the compiler is generating the code for (+) for the
> particular instance, rather than using a run-time dispa
> I had a discussion with someone over the type class mechanism and would like
> to clarify something.
>
> When I compile this trivial program:
>
> > module Main where
> > main = putStrLn (show (1 + 2))
>
> with ghc -Wall, the compiler says:
>
> Main.lhs:3:
> Warning: Defaulting the followi
I had a discussion with someone over the type class mechanism and would like
to clarify something.
When I compile this trivial program:
> module Main where
> main = putStrLn (show (1 + 2))
with ghc -Wall, the compiler says:
Main.lhs:3:
Warning: Defaulting the following constraint(s) to type
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 2:33 am, Abraham Egnor wrote:
> I'd like to make a haskell binding for a C++ library. Most of the tools
> out there seem oriented towards c bindings, so it looks like I'll be
> writing the FFI code generator myself. While I'm at it I figure I might
> as well just make a ge
Strange. I have used this form many times without difficulties.
Perhaps, it is a platform-dependant bug.
Tom
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 03:33 pm, Filip wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have function
> f:: a -> b
>
> and I need something like this:
>
> myaccept:: Socket -> IO ()
> myaccept g = do a <- accept g
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
