What are the possibilities for website construction using Haskell?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Jan 13, 2008 8:13 PM, Derek Elkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Applications_and_libraries/Web_programming
Good link. Lots of options apparently :-)
I'm sure you can figure it out from here, or at least come back with a
more specific question.
Which ones
I seem to remember a thread about this a while back actually, but...
Any chance of adding the number of downloads to the hackageDB page?
For those packages that are included in ghc, hugs etc, perhaps add a
green tick with included in ghc, included in hugs, etc?
That way it should be relatively
On Jan 9, 2008 5:43 PM, Derek Elkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A shorter and lighter and and also interesting and entertaining read is:
http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/Papers/haskell-retrospective/index.htm
While the reason Haskell was pure was to support laziness, at this point
though
Linq went live in C# in November, as part of .Net 3.5.
It adds lots of FP-things to C#.
It's really fun to be able to use Haskell-ish things in C#.
Manipulating lists and collections just got *much* easier.
Things it does:
- map, fold, filter are all there (they're called select, agregate,
On Jan 12, 2008 10:19 PM, Rafael Almeida [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After some profiling I found out that about 94% of the execution time is
spent in the ``isPerfectSquare'' function.
I guess that Haskell's referential transparence means the answers to
the isPerfectSquare will be cached, ie
On Jan 12, 2008 10:54 PM, Henning Thielemann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008, Hugh Perkins wrote:
I guess that Haskell's referential transparence means the answers to
the isPerfectSquare will be cached, ie automatically memoized? (not
sure if is correct term?)
http
On Nov 3, 2007 5:00 AM, Ryan Dickie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lossless File compression, AKA entropy coding, attempts to maximize the
amount of information per bit (or byte) to be as close to the entropy as
possible. Basically, gzip is measuring (approximating) the amount of
information
On 10/31/07, Paulo J. Matos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello all,
I, along with some friends, have been looking to Haskell lately. I'm
very happy with Haskell as a language, however, a friend sent me the
link:
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/
Careful: it's worse than you think. Many
On 10/26/07, John Meacham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Heh, the plethora of pdf papers on Haskell is part of what originally
brought me to respect it. Something about that metafont painted cmr
just makes me giddy as a grad student. A beautifully rendered type
inference table is a masterful work of
On 10/14/07, Vimal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Haskellers,
I have been trying my best to read about Haskell from the various
tutorials available on the internet and blogs. I havent been following
YAHT properly, so its always been learning from 'bits and pieces'
scattered around.
You might
You're picking on Andrew Coppin? That's insane. He's got a sense of
humour, and he's a lay (non-phd) person.
Honestly, in one thread you've got Haskell is misunderstood! Its the
greatest language in the world! Why does no-one use it and in
another you're insulting one of the few non-phds
Correction, I'm also very interested in Haskell, and I even don't have a
bachelor degree :-) I'm a completely self-educated kind-a-guy...
That's true, and actually you and Andrew are two of the people whose
opinions I respect the most. Well, I'll add SPJ to that list I guess.
Anyway, IMHO
On 10/3/07, Peter Verswyvelen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I needed to type at least 3 times the amount of code, much
of which was boilerplate code, and the code is not elegant.
Reflection is your friend here.
Example. Code before reflection:
MyConfig
{
// some properties here
public
Have you tried F#? I mean, I havent ;-) but maybe it's an interesting
half-way house? Presumably you can use all the standard .Net
libraries (maybe good enough for getting asp.net working etc?), and
you can still use FP constructs?
I understand F# is not pure (I think?), and doesnt have monads,
Gotta love lazy infinite loops :-D
Sounds like something out of a Douglas Adams novel.
Ok, this post is totally off-topic...
On 9/22/07, Pasqualino 'Titto' Assini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The funny thing is that, while it is stuck in an infinite loop, GHCi
doesn't seem to use any CPU time
Couple of thoughts/observations:
- Erlang has a vm, so that would avoid building a vm.
On the downside, erlang is not pure: the message-passing and the io:
commands imply the possibility of side-effects.
Still, it could be good enough for a proof-of-concept?
- implementation as a library
Just out of curiosity, how could one do something like a factory, so
that by default a library uses, say, Data.Map, but by making a simple
assignment we can switch the library to use a different
implementation?
(This is alluded to above, but not explicitly stated. I guess it's
too easy, but
On 9/18/07, Hugh Perkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how could one do something like a factory, so
that by default a library uses, say, Data.Map, but by making a simple
assignment we can switch the library to use a different
implementation?
(And of course, the 10 million
On 9/3/07, Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FYI, I am old enough to actually remember life before MS and I can
also remember what's happened to the industry at large and to various
the organisations I've worked in and had dealings with over the last
25 years or so.
Fair enough.
On 9/3/07, Peter Verswyvelen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, then you should take a look at Boo... http://boo.codehaus.org
Yes, I've looked at Boo a little. It looks cool. It made me think
that a lot of language wars boils down not just to the syntactic sugar
that hits one in the face at the
On 9/2/07, Sven Panne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
High-qualitiy standard libraries which are packaged with GHC/Hugs/... will
probably almost never be downloaded separately.
Good point. Note however that if someone is hunting for a library,
it's generally because it's not already bundled with
On 9/2/07, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in the early 90s
I think I found the flaw in your argument ;-)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Sooo.. what is the modern equivalent of Prolog?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Off-topic, so stop reading now if you want ;-) , but reminds me of my
experience using Python and C++. Python and C++ are both great
languages, with their own strengths, and one might think that
combining thing gets the best of both.
However, using Swig etc to join Python to C++ takes a
On 9/3/07, Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The popularity of MS
Winders or Office Suite are the obvious examples. We all know why these
are used on 95% or whatever of the worlds PCs, and it has nothing
whatever to do with quality.
Oh come on. You've been reading waaayyy too much
On 9/3/07, Derek Elkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because no one has said it quite this way:
The modern equivalent of Prolog is Prolog.
Ok, thanks. Just wanted to check that.
(btw, just thought, when I was talking about FFI, probably meant
Forth, not Prolog. FFI for Prolog probably isnt that
(BTW I thought the FFI for Forth was the Forth assembler; have things
changed since FIG/F83?)
I didnt have a real PC, just a ZX Spectrum. It wasnt real Forth, just
Spectrum Forth. It was kindof fun, but a little disappointing not to
be able to do anything useful with it. Well, I wanted to
Just noticed, erlang has the second kind of bimap (a bijection?)
built into each process:
From http://www.erlang.org/doc/reference_manual/processes.html :
10.9 Process Dictionary
Each process has its own process dictionary, accessed by calling the
following BIFs:
put(Key, Value)
get(Key)
get()
Cool I had prolog for my Spectrum, many years ago (83?), but I
stopped using it when I realized it didnt have any input/output
capabilities beyond print, and no way to escape from the prolog
bubble, eg FFI (not sure what FFI stands for, but I think it is a
way for Haskell to escape into other
A really simple way to track the quality of a package is to display
the number of downloads.
A posteriorae, this works great in other download sites.
We can easily hypothesize about why a download count gives a decent
indication of some measure of quality:
- more people downloading it means more
On 8/30/07, Miguel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about running Haskell on a PostScript printer? PostScript IS
Turing-complete.
Yes, because postscript printers are famous for being really fast ;-)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Dan Piponi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://developer.nvidia.com/object/cuda.html
It's a C compiler with multiprocessor streaming extensions that
targets nvidia cards.
Whoa :-O Cool :-)
But it's not that simple...
Few things are ;-) Whats the catch? Can we use a graphics-card as an
n-core
So, according to the blurb, and since this is product-specific, I dont
know if this is allowed on the newsgroup?, but it does seem to be a
fairly unique product? :
- this technology works on GeGForce 8800 cards or better
- there's a dedicated processing unit available called the Tesla,
which is
On 8/30/07, Bulat Ziganshin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it's the same as 8800GTX. please read CUDA manual first. these 128
threads are not independent, each 8 or 16 threads execute the same
code
H, yes you are right. The GPU contains 8 multiprocessors, where
each multiprocessor contains
On 8/31/07, Dan Piponi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right. But the functions and data that we are trying to map and fold
could be anything, so we are required to have the full functionality
of Haskell running on the GPU - unless the compiler can smartly figure
out what should run on the GPU and
On 8/30/07, Derek Elkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Either the language of the graphics card is Turing complete and the
answer is yes or the language isn't and the answer is no.
Well, a quick google for are graphics cards turing complete?
suggests that some nVidia cards are Turing complete, but I
On 8/22/07, Twan van Laarhoven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But Double is already quite badly behaved:
let x = 1e20
Prelude 1 + (x - x)
1.0
Prelude (1 + x) - x
0.0
E. Whilst that's understandable and unavoidable, that kindof
rings alarm bells for folds of Doubles in an automatic
On 8/22/07, Brandon Michael Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Automatic threading is inherently limited by data dependencies.
You can't run a function that branches on an argument in parallel
with the computation producing that argument. Even with arbitrarily
many processors and no communication
On 8/11/07, Neil Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're absolutely right that a dynamic/adaptive approach is the only
one that will work when the tasks are of unknown size. Whether this
approach is as easy as you think is open for you to prove. I look
forward to testing your VM
On 8/21/07, Tim Chevalier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think you have to worry too much about the political
obstacles. People want automatic multithreading, and in a year or two
we'll all have multicore boxen. In any case, if you don't solve the
technical problems, the political ones will
Exactly. For this to work there needs to be the constraint that there's a
one-to-one mapping in each direction. The Bimap should have the uniqueness
promise that Set (k, v) gives. Yet you should be able to search on either
tuple value.
Or... have the possibility of returning a list of values.
On 8/21/07, Stefan O'Rear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Currently, it's never worse. GHC's backend is about as good as GCC;
most of the optimiations it doesn't do are not possible for GCC because
of various lack-of-information problems (the stack pointer never aliases
the heap pointer, stuff like
On 8/21/07, Andrew Coppin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I highly doubt that automatic threading will happen any time this decade
- but I just learned something worth while from reading this email. ;-)
That's an interesting observation. I cant say I dont believe it, but
I'm interested to know why
Thank-you for the information. It was very useful. Couple of reactions FWIW:
On 8/21/07, Stefan O'Rear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sooo if I was feeling evil, could I take this c-code and pipe it
into something that turns it into C#???
Yes. You could do the same with the original
I was looking for something like this too.
Note that Erlang can do this ;-) but Erlang is probably not so
strongly typed, so it's easier to do?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On 8/10/07, Stefan O'Rear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Haskell's purpose: To be a generally cool language
Haskell's competition: C++, SML, ... hundreds of thousands more and I make
no assertion of a representative sample ...
Well, C++ is not really competitive with Haskell, because C++ does not
On 8/10/07, Bulat Ziganshin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if you mean Erlang's sophisticated rules of which messages in queue to
process first - this may be not yet implemented for Haskell. if you
mean that program is just many threads which pass messages through
channels to each other - it's
On 8/10/07, Bayley, Alistair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, the Harris/Singh paper summarises the common problems:
- not many programs are inherently parallel
If thats the case, then multicores are not going to be very useful. Where
there's a will there's a way.
What I think is: if maps etc
Well, managed to shave 25% of C# execution time by writing my own bit
array. For now, I will concede that, under the conditions of the shoot,
bitarrays in c# are slower than bitarrays in Haskell. I'll let you know if
I get any new ideas on this.
Getting back to the original problem, which is:
Haskell vs GC'd imperative languages
===
On 8/10/07, Thomas Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, C++ is not really competitive with Haskell, because C++ does not
have
a GC, and it's trivial to corrupt the stack/heap.
Beg to differ. I offer the following proof by
On 8/10/07, Stefan O'Rear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bool is 32 bits, but Don is using UArray. UArray is not parametric in
the element type, which means it's less generally useful (no UArray of
Complex Double, for instance), but conversely it is able to use more
efficient representations
On 8/10/07, Donald Bruce Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's using bit arrays.
Well I'm a total Haskell newbie, and you're using Haskell to write
imperative code, so it's really hard for me to read, but looking at your
code, you have:
(IOUArray Int Bool) -- an array of Bool
Bool is a
On 8/10/07, Michael Vanier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to get the history right: garbage collectors have been around a
_long_ time, since the '60s in
Lisp systems. They only became known to most programmers through Java
(which is one unarguable good
thing that Java did).
Ah interesting
On 8/10/07, Donald Bruce Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, STUArray s Int Bool is a bit array.
Look at the space use. Or try replacing Bool with Word32, and see what
happens.
Fair enough. Well, the mono example in the shootout is lacking quite a few
optimizations, eg its using the
Not many replies on this thread? Am I so wrong that no-one's even telling
me? I find it hard to believe that if there were obvious errors in the
proposition that anyone would resist pointing them out to me ;-)
So, that leaves a couple of possibilites: some people are agreeing, but see
no point
On 8/11/07, Thomas Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are many papers about this in the Parallel Logic Programming
area. It is commonly called Embarrassing Parallelism.
Ah, I wasnt very precise ;-) I didnt mean I dont understand the
problem; I meant I dont understand why people think it is
On 8/8/07, Brian Hulley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In contrast, all the pure functional GUIs that I've seen are just
wrappers around someone else's imperative code, and moreover, they
exchange the simplicity of the object oriented imperative API for a
veritable mindstorm of unbelievably heavy,
On 8/9/07, peterv [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO and being a newbie having 20 years of professional C/C++/C#
experience but hardly any Haskell experience, I agree with this… I find the
monad syntax very confusing, because it looks so much like imperative code,
but it isn't. Personally I also
To be fair, GTK is pretty standard. This is so even for big name gc'd
imperative languages such as C#. Sure, you can use Windows.Forms in C#, but
you often wouldnt, because of the patent burden. Also, gtk in partnership
with glade rocks!
How easy is gtk to use from haskell by the way? In gc'd
On 8/9/07, Marc Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-- load up the glade file
dialogXmlM - xmlNew simple.glade
let dialogXml = case dialogXmlM of
(Just dialogXml) - dialogXml
Nothing - error can't find the glade file \simple.glade\
\
On 8/9/07, ok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We get extra , =, \, -, and in tokens, but no new parentheses.
Yes exactly. It's the = and that gets rid of the parentheses, and
reverses the order of the operations.
I cant remember where I saw this, but somewhere there is a monad tutorial
that starts
Hi,
Really interested in doing a phd on threading. Any ideas how I'd go about
doing/applying for that? Basically, threading seems to be the cutting-edge
right out (for a while) as processor frequencies top out, and multicores
increase.
I dont have any formal CS training, but I do have a degree
On 8/7/07, Murray Gross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am working on a parallel brute-force solver, which will be tested on
25x25 puzzles (my current serial solver requires less than 1 second for
the most difficult 9x9 puzzles I've been able to find; while I haven't
tried it on 16x16 puzzles on
On 8/7/07, Hugh Perkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Question: what do you mean by, for example 25x25? Do you mean grids with
a total length of 25 on each side, eg:
(because on my super-dooper 1.66GHz Celeron, generating 10 random 25x25
grids such as the one above takes about 1.01 seconds
On 8/8/07, Conal Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*Unless*, you abandon the traditional acceleration of a fixed set of 2D
(or 3D) primitives and transformations and instead compile into graphics
processor code as in http://conal.net/Vertigo .
Wow, cool :-)
There's a neat Haskell solution to the knapsack problem which runs very
fast. I'm not 100% sure that it runs faster than an optimal solution in
other GC'd imperative languages, but it's very concise and not (too)
convoluted. Have a search for the thread with xkcd in the title.
Chung-chieh Shan
Note that the official way to solve sudoku is to use dancing links, but
I guess you are creating a naive implementation precisely as a base-line
against which to measure other implementations?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On 8/7/07, Donald Bruce Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See also,
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Sudoku
-- Don
Just out of ... errr curiosity... which of those implementations is the
fastest?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
On 8/7/07, Donald Bruce Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No idea. You could compile them all with -O2, run them on a set of
puzzles, and produce a table of results :-)
Well I could, but I wont ;-) If you had to guess which one is fastest which
one would you guess?
I'm a little surprised no
This is totally off-topic, but... how could I go about getting hold of the
information on per-country exports and imports of specific types of things?
(lets say for example, a thing could be: coffee ,but also a computer
program, so not just physical commodities, but also services and somewhat
* Haskell* is an incredibly elegantly-designed and beautiful car, which
is rumored to be able to drive over extremely strange terrain. The one time
you tried to drive it, it didn't actually drive along the road; instead, it
made copies of itself and the road, with each successive copy of the
C would be an engine. You have to add the wheels. If you use anything but
a 75.0% mix of gasoline to oil, it explodes.
Fine you guys can have Haskell as the hovercraft, not one of those big ones
mind, one of those Florida glades ones, like in Lassie, with one guy sitting
on it, weaving between
On 7/23/07, Jonathan Cast [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fine you guys can have Haskell as the hovercraft, not one of those big
ones
mind,
How do you get that Haskell has to be small? It seems a great big
language to
me.
Well, partly to be controversial, partly because one of those small
heh! well everyone was busy working on icfp or something, so the newsgroup
was pretty dead :-) And I played with opengl a little, which gave better
results than I thought, but not good enough to pursue, and the whole program
was in imperative dos anyway, so I couldnt quite see what was the point
On 7/22/07, Neil Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, if we use the rule that anywhere we encounter span (not . g)
we can replace it with break g then we can redefine break as:
break g = break g
For some reason this reminds me of the paradoxes of being able to go back in
time. What I
I'm not sure if you're talking about C++ ABIs or C ABIs? If you're already
using a C ABI, and you're getting incompatibilities, well I have nothing
useful to say :-)
If you're talking about C++ ABIs, technically it's possible to use a
Generator to drop-down into a C ABI, pump across the
Newbie question: why does the following give Not in scope 'c' for the last
line?
string :: Parsec.Parser String
string = do c - Parsec.letter
do cs - string
return c:cs
Parsec.| return [c]
(This is copied more or less rote from
Kindof vaguely made a start on this, but cant quite see how to handle
variables.
I guess variables can be stored as a (Map.Map String Double), at least for a
first draft?
Then, I'm building up two hierarchies in parallel:
- a set of parsec functions to parse the incoming string into a Program
Ok, that got the variables working.
Example:
*Minim evaluateprog $ ProgramTree ( ProgramLeaf $ AssignmentStatement(
VarAssignment (Variable test) ( ValueFromConstant (Constant 3 (
PrintStatement (PrintValue( ValueFromVariable(Variable test
3.0
3.0
I'm having eval return the IO monad,
Thank-you for the explanation :-) You make it very easy to understand,
awesome :-)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
You can get the head and the tail by pattern matching. Lets say you have a
function that takes a list:
myfunction list = -- do something here
go = myfuction [1,4,2,6]
... you can write the list bit of the function as (x:xs), where x is the
head, or first element, of the list, and xs is the
Not applying (probably not eligible), just answering for fun, so feel free
to pipe to null :-D :
Is your target user for the language the end-user of the toy itself, or a
toy designer who will be using your middleware?
I'm guessing the latter. Is there any reason why you cant use Lua? It's an
Just found this in a gmail adtext link, it's quite interesting (and
convincing): http://www.janestcapital.com/yaron_minsky-cufp_2006.pdf
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On 7/19/07, Sebastian Sylvan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, since Haskell is lazy and only the first element is required
for minimumValue, the above algorithm should be O(n).
That's pretty cool :-)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
On 7/17/07, Martin Coxall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder why 'we' aren't pushing things like this big time. When Ruby
took off, more than anything else it was because of Rails. Web
programming is something 'the kids' can really get into, and it caused
Ruby to explode into the mainstream geek
On 7/17/07, Thomas Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And this is where I think Haskell has it all over C++, Java, and the
rest. Haskell is easy to learn at a simple level, and hard to learn at
the expert level, but once learned is very powerful and has excellent
payoffs in terms of productivity.
On 7/18/07, brad clawsie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i have wondered what it would take to get a mod_haskell for apache
If you make a mod_haskell, please make sure it's secure. It's insanely hard
to convince web hosting companies to add support for new
mod_myfavoritelanguagehere. If the mod
On 7/16/07, Bulat Ziganshin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Topcoder certainly isn't about benchmarking. Undoubtedly, it would be
absolutely awesome to be able to use Haskell in topcoder... but it
wouldn't say anything about speed. My guess is that practically no
topcoder submissions fail by
On 7/16/07, Tom Pledger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll be a nuisance and bring up this case:
solve 150005 [2, 4, 150001]
Argh, that makes my solution hang! :-/
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On 7/16/07, Chung-chieh Shan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's my solution to the xkcd problem (yay infinite lists):
dynamic programming?
Cool :-)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
Your solution looks really elegant, and runs insanely fast. Can you explain
how it works?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On 7/16/07, Malcolm Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After all, we would expect the same attributes (intelligence and
training) from a neurosurgeon, a nuclear scientist, or someone who
calculates how to land a person on the moon. Programming computers may
not seem very skilled to most people,
Sebastian,
Why would I write a slow, complicated algorithm in C#?
I'm not making these comparisons for some academic paper, I'm trying to get
a feel for how the languages run in practice.
And really in practice, I'm never going to write a prime algorithm using
merge and so on, I'd just use the
Hey, guys, I just realized this test is not really fair!
I've been using the Microsoft .Net compiler ,which is a proprietary
closed-source compiler.
To be fair to Haskell, we should probably compare it to other open source
products, such as g++ and mono?
Here are the timings ;-)
Haskell
On 7/15/07, Sebastian Sylvan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[me thinks he doth protest too much] ;-)
The rules of the competition are quite fair: both sides make an optimal
algorithm using their preferred language. It's ok to hardcode the first 3
or 4 primes if you must, hardcoding the entire
On 7/15/07, Donald Bruce Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip] unsafeWrite[snip]
[snip]unsafeRead[snip]
Hi Donald, the idea is to use this for operational code, so avoiding unsafe
operations is preferable ;-) You'll note that the C# version is not using
unsafe operations, although to be
On 7/15/07, Donald Bruce Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What C# version are you using, by the way? (So I can check if it does
any tricks).
- csc is in the Microsoft.Net Framework 2.0 runtime, which you can download
from microsoft.com (free download).
- gmcs/mono are from Mono 1.2.2.1 ,
On 7/15/07, Sebastian Sylvan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
unsafe' here just means direct array indexing. Same as the other
languages. Haskell's 'unsafe' is a little more paranoid that other
languages.
Yes, I was kindof hoping it was something like that. Cool :-)
Since the goal is to flip
On 7/15/07, Hugh Perkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/15/07, Sebastian Sylvan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
unsafe' here just means direct array indexing. Same as the other
languages. Haskell's 'unsafe' is a little more paranoid that other
languages.
Yes, I was kindof hoping
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
