Hi Arjan,
the underlying GNU binutils issue which causes this was
fixed some 9 months ago. I've been using a new mingw
binutils snapshot for a while which includes it -- it's
available from
http://www.mingw.org/download.shtml
(look for binutils-2.15.90-20040222.)
You'll still see the
Bugs item #972909, was opened at 2004-06-15 11:25
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=108032aid=972909group_id=8032
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
On 03 June 2004 15:56, Goran Topic wrote:
I am a newcomer to functional programming, and I would like to learn
it very much. However, I'm also starting to deal with parallel
programming, and I thought I'd combine my two interests.
So I grabbed the Debian ghc6 package (v6.2), and (after a
On 09 June 2004 20:09, Christian Maeder wrote:
I wrote:
since version 6.2 we have 2 binary distributions for (generic)
linux: for glibc 2.2 and glibc 2.3
Maybe this is no longer necessary. I've produced an installation
(under glibc 2.2) that runs under glibc 2.2 and glibc 2.3.
I've now
On 10 June 2004 01:15, John Meacham wrote:
I was curious what the best way would be to access the various useful
GMP functions which are not exported for Integers. I was thinking of
making my own (strict) Integer type, but it would be much easier if I
can just use the FFI to import the
On 10 June 2004 05:32, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
The problem appears to be in the hash keys of the type representation
used to compare to types for equality. A dynamic value in the
(statically compiled) application never has the same key as its
equivalent type in the dynamically loaded
To clarify some of the points in this discussion:
Alastair is right in that the finalizer thread isn't necessarily run to
completion if the main thread exits. GHC does run any outstanding
finalizers at the end of the program, but it doesn't necessarily
complete any existing finalizer threads
On 14 June 2004 03:03, Andrei de A. Formiga wrote:
I need to generate DLLs (in Windows) and shared
libraries (in unix environments) that expose some
Haskell functions (directly or through a C stub). My
first option is having ghc generate the libs directly
with the foreign export
Duncan Coutts wrote:
The GHC run time system is designed to block without using CPU when all
threads are blocked doing IO.
Could you give more details? It would be useful to see the code or
preferably a small test case that demonstrates your problem. What
version of ghc are you using? Which OS are
On 02 June 2004 18:41, David Brown wrote:
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 06:19:00PM +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-02 at 17:44, David Brown wrote:
Any estimates on the difficulty of changing Linker.c to be able to
use standard dynamic link calls (dlopen, ...) rather than having to
be
On 02 June 2004 18:40, Bennett Todd wrote:
I too would be happy with an unregistered build.
I've tried off and on to port ghc to my linux distro (uses static
linking against uClibc, glibc isn't present at all). Every time I go
through the process, I get stuck at the point where I seem to
2004-06-14T16:06:05 Simon Marlow:
You probably don't want to install the registerised build; just use it
to build a fresh tree:
$ ./configure
--with-ghc=/unregisterised-build/ghc/compiler/ghc-inplace
$ make
Thanks, I'll give it another go. It'll be a few days before I can
get back with
On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 05:03:20PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
Actually, this isn't the question that I have. This is about ghci's
dynamic loading of C objects (or other similar language). There is a
handrolled linker in the ghci code. I'm interested in replacing this
handrolled linker
Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For the GPH project, go here:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~dsg/gph/
There's also a bit of information in:
http://www.haskell.org/communities/05-2004/html/report.html#gph
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
Well I just tried it and that's what happened:
==fptools== make boot - --no-print-directory -r;
in ghc-6.2.1/ghc/utils/ghc-pkg
ghc-test/usr/bin/ghc -M
This was causing the error:
version = tail \
\ GHC_PKG_VERSION
However, when i moved it all in one line it worked and i got as far as this
but i think that's the end of the line for now:
==fptools== make boot -wr;
in
simonmar:
On 10 June 2004 05:32, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
The problem appears to be in the hash keys of the type representation
used to compare to types for equality. A dynamic value in the
(statically compiled) application never has the same key as its
equivalent type in the
At the moment I am unable to load the hs-plugins package into GHCi (or
via the hs-plugins load() either). It seems the linker is always unable
to find the symbols we bind to in Linker.c, i.e. addDLL, loadObj, and
friends. How can I get the linker to see the HSrts/libHSrts symbols
exported by
I'm finding that a recurring theme in my work with Haskell libraries (and
in particular the XML libraries) is the awkwardness of handling errors
outside the IO monad.
While it's often very easy to write some code that performs some function,
assuming that the inputs are valid, as soon as code
I can't see any fundamental reason why exception handling has to occur in
the IO monad.
Read the paper _A Semantics for Imprecise Exceptions_. The problem is that the
evaluation order of Haskell would have to be fixed for this not to lose referential
transparency. What is the value of
On Mon, 2004-06-14 at 14:34, Graham Klyne wrote:
I'm finding that a recurring theme in my work with Haskell libraries (and
in particular the XML libraries) is the awkwardness of handling errors
outside the IO monad.
With GHC You can throw exceptions in pure code but may only catch them
in
Tom,
Then what will you do when naming operations in a class? Is it right that
care has to be taken in order not to conflict with other classes?
Say, I have a Person class where I want to define an operation getName.
Is it wise to name it getPersonName instead?
I notice that FiniteMap always
Keith Wansbrough wrote:
Read the paper _A Semantics for Imprecise Exceptions_. The
problem is that the evaluation order of Haskell would have to
be fixed for this not to lose referential transparency. What
is the value of
catchExcept (show (makeExcept E1 + makeExcept E2))
(\x - x)
===
6th International Workshop on
Soft Constraints and Preferences
September 27th, 2004
Toronto, Canada
Held in conjunction with
10th International Conference on
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Keith Wansbrough wrote:
(snip)
to lose referential transparency. What is the value of
catchExcept (show (makeExcept E1 + makeExcept E2)) (\x - x)
? Haskell wouldn't be purely functional any more.
(snip)
We've already had these issues raised on haskell-cafe when I've
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Tim Docker wrote:
Both of these approaches seem fairly invasive in their
effect on the code. Are people using haskell for real world
tasks happy with having to choose from these? The former is
more general, but any function that needs to be able to
fail or propagate
Now I see it. Thanks.
Thanks also for the reference. Nice paper!
So now where do I stand?
I still think that being forced to handle exceptions in the IO monad is
(sometimes) inconvenient, but I can now see why it is required for a
rigorous language semantics. My problem relates to wanting to
Philippa Cowderoy wrote:
The ability to fail doesn't need the do notation, just use of
return for success - similar for propagating failure.
I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean writing functions
like:
sqr x | x 0 = fail less than zero
| otherwise = return (sqrt x)
If
Philippa Cowderoy wrote:
The ability to fail doesn't need the do notation, just use of
return for success - similar for propagating failure.
I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean writing functions
like:
sqr x | x 0 = fail less than zero
| otherwise = return
Keith Wansbrough wrote:
s/fail/error/
s/return//
Then you can easily write
I can't (easily) write
text c = sqr x + sqr (x+1)
You just can't *catch* this outside the IO monad.
Of course... that was my second alternative error
strategy. I'm interest in how/when people decide
I assume the suggested mapException function [sect 5.4] remains
unproblematic ... is it (or some equivalent) actually implemented?
http://etudiants.insia.org/~jbobbio/pafp/docs/base/Control.Exception.html#v%
3AmapException
The same page has a host of other useful operations.
Two useful
On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 14:39, Sean E. Russell wrote:
On Friday 26 March 2004 17:04, Carl Witty wrote:
Are you aware of this:
2001-12-12
* Due to wanting to get on with other things, I'm freezing the
shootout as is, with no further updates planned. It isn't
On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 05:41:03PM +0100, Keith Wansbrough wrote:
Philippa Cowderoy wrote:
The ability to fail doesn't need the do notation, just use of
return for success - similar for propagating failure.
I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean writing functions
like:
On 12/06/2004, at 9:52 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, when writing haskell code. It is so annoying that name clashes keep
happening.
I have to be careful about the data constructor names, about the class
names, about the class member names.
I understand that we can use class to achieve some
Another problem is that people learning haskell, especially those coming
from a OO background or language like java, tend to write code that
needlessly exasperates the naming conflict problem.
I think this is because of the initial steps one usually takes in other
languages, the first thing one
Graham Klyne writes:
Another approach that occurs to me is to introduce an error Monad
along the lines of that described by Philip Wadler as E in his
Essence of functional programming paper [1]. (Or just use Either
as an error monad?, which is part of what I've been doing with my XML
work.)
Hi,
Is it possible to have more than one module defined
in a single file ? As far as I can tell, the Haskell
Report doesn't prohibit this, but so far my tests with
hugs and ghc indicate they don't accept multi-module
files. Is this standard ? Thanks.
---
[]s, Andrei de A. Formiga
hello,
according to the report there should be no connection between modules
and files, and one should be able to have multiple modules in a file,
and even a single module in multiple files. however none of the
implementations
support that, so in effect there is 1-1 correspondence between
38 matches
Mail list logo
