On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 07:02:18PM +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
I noticed that the 6.3 version of the PprLib.hs is not fully implemented
so pretty printing some things calls Prelude.undefined.
Thanks - looks like something I forgot to go back to.
Attached patch typechecks but I've not
| detail, of course ;). What I'm secretly hoping is that the
| GHC/hugs/HBC people will see what I'm trying to achieve, tell me I'm
| totally nuts, and then suggest an alternative, much simpler approach
| which gives us exactly the same goal ...
As I implied earlier, I am thus far unconvinced
| So there is no sub-typing, no row polymorphism, no attempt to give
| f r = r.x
| a fancy type that makes f applicable to any record with an x field.
|
| On the other hand, there is also no problem with many records having
the
| same field name either, which is the problem we started with.
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
If the big bug-bear is record selectors, let's focus on them
exclusively. I now think that ML got it right. ML records are simply
labelled tuples.
Note that this is true only for SML, not for Caml.
So just as (Bool,Int) is an anonymous type, so is
{x::Bool, y::Int}.
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| Actually, #l is just syntactic sugar for (\{l=x,...}-x), which
implies
| that you might need type annotations.
Yes I was wrong to say that there are no implicitly-defined record
selectors; (#l r) is exactly that. Syntactically I'd prefer (r.l); but
regardless, it's a
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 09:21:23AM -, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
My personal view is this: we should have adopted the ML view of records.
It solves the immediate problem, and no more elaborate scheme seems
sufficiently right to be declared the winner.Alas, like all other
proposals, it's
GHC executable file only works in MS-DOS. I would like run the
executable file on Windows. Can someone help meThanks
___
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Hi
While we're talking about SML, I think there are a few other things
worth stealing...
1) I still miss multiline pattern matching in lambda
(fn p1 = e1 | p2 = e2 | ...)
not strictly necessary, but often less disruptive of the text than
either a let/where-introduced helper-function or \ x
hello,
looking through the documentation for Data.Word I run into the follwoing
comment:
it would be very natural to add a type Natural providing an unbounded
size unsigned integer, just as Integer provides unbounded size signed
integers. We do not do that yet since there is no demand for it.
it would also be useful to have finite natural numbers, ala C's
unsigned int.
Word8, Word16, Word32 and Word64
--
Alastair Reid www.haskell-consulting.com
___
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
it would be very natural to add a type Natural providing an unbounded
size unsigned integer, just as Integer provides unbounded size signed
integers. We do not do that yet since there is no demand for it.
if that is not too much work could we have that in the library? i think
it would be very
Hi,
thanks for your suggestion. The thing is, that I don't want to change the
type of my transformation functions.
To answer Iavor's question: I have basically two types of transformation
functions. One StringTransformation (String - String) and one
transformation with a string and something
12 matches
Mail list logo
