I guess he is asking how to define a modifiable list in Haskell.
I leave the answer to the experts.
AFAIK updating in place can only be done with the (ST s) monad.
Scott
- Original Message -
From: fouad ktiri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 2:03 PM
- Original Message -
From: Marita Wojdak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 1MargieD [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 1 juni 2000 16:58
Subject: Fw: Fatima 10
God love you,
Marita
Helpers of Our Lady Queen of Peace
http://web.frontier.net/cgallagher
- Original Message -
From:
|From: Lennart Augustsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|To: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Cc: Frank Atanassow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 12:07 PM
|Subject: Re: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
Jan Brosius wrote:
"x" in the domain of
I also think it is hopeless , but I still want to try again
*- Original Message -
*From: Frank Atanassow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*To: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Cc: Frank Atanassow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 12:59 PM
*Subject: Re: more detailed
From: Peter Douglass [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Jan Brosius' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Frank Atanassow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 6:03 PM
Subject: RE: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
| Jan Brosius wrote:
|
| look at this example
en another framework than the one proposed in Haskell
Very friendly
Jan Brosius
- Original Message -
From: Lars Lundgren [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: more detailed explanation about forall
From: Frank Atanassow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 1:35 PM
Subject: Fw: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
Jan Brosius writes:
Why do some computer scientists have such problems with the good
logical
Sorry, if in some way I have upset you
Sincerely
Jan Brosius
From: Frank Atanassow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Frank Atanassow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 1:50 PM
Subject: Fw: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
Frank Atanassow writes:
Jan Brosius writes
- Original Message -
From: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Carl R. Witty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 12:06 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
Thanks Carl for letting me see an ugly error that I made . SHAME on me
From: Frank Atanassow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
Jan Brosius writes:
I must put this in the good way;
[forall x . alpha(x)] = alpha(x
t want to ask if this reflects completely the idea of runST as defined
in Haskell?
I can also say that there is an algebraic isomorphism from propositional
calculus onto a boolean algebra.
ARE we for this reason going to mix+ with or etc.
e.g. a or b + c and d . f
This doen't look as a good
here in the definition one does not
consider the case [a] == [] .
Now I write
len :: Int
len = runST' (liftM length (readFile "foo") :: ST RealWorld Int)
which creates a global value of type Int which changes in time. Oops!
Oops! Did the above program work in Hugs ? Or did it com
From: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
Tue, 16 May 2000 10:54:59 +0200, Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pisze:
newSTRef v has type ST s (STRef s (STRef s
- Original Message -
From: Lars Lundgren [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
On Tue, 16 May 2000, Jan Brosius wrote:
Ok I understand this isomorphism better. However this remark seems
- Original Message -
From: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
Tue, 16 May 2000 22:37:45 +0200, Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pisze:
newSTRef applied to some value can have
- Original Message -
From: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Richard Uhtenwoldt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 1:23 AM
Subject: Re: more detailed explanation about forall in Haskell
- Original Message -
From: Richard Uhtenwoldt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jan
Marcin Kowalczyk wrote at Wed, May 10, 2000 7:54 PM :
Wed, 10 May 2000 16:18:06 +0200, Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pisze:
pisze ? you meant wrote? Please don't use Russian in your reply, I don't
know Russian.
Do You know what pisze in Dutch could mean if spoken out loosely?
2. Next let
Jan Brosius writes:
Marcin Kowalczyk wrote at Wed, May 10, 2000 7:54 PM :
2. Next let me point out once and for all that
logical quantifiers are used only in logical formula's .
Types can be treated as logical formulas, according to the
Curry-Howard
Hi,
is there any way to email written stuff to the Haskell
committee?
Very Friendly
Jan Brosius
ly from which doubly quantified formula your formula
comes from.
Thu, 11 May 2000 13:48:56 +0200, Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pisze:
Types can be treated as logical formulas, according to the
Curry-Howard
isomorphism.
Sorry, never heard of in logic. But perhaps you can explain.
Others explai
appears as a type
restrictor.
Thanks for reading , sorry for the typo's.
Very Friendly,
Jan Brosius
PS: I have the impression that no notice is taken
of the remarks given in my first email.
I hope the Haskell committee will take notice of
these remarks after reading these more detailed
explanation.
It
I also support the idea's , and It doesn't chande the language it only
structures it, but I am a lightweight in Haskellland.
Sometimes I wonder if the readers are overworked or just plainly arrogant.
Friendly
Jan Brosius
- Original Message -
From: Jan Skibinski [EMAIL PROTECTED
- Original Message -
From: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: About the abuse of forall in Haskell
May 03, 2000 12:53 AM Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
Tue, 2 May
sense doing.
But perhaps it is not possible in a statically typed language.
More about this will be clear in a forthcoming email that I am now preparing
titled "About the abuse of frall in Haskell"
Friendly
Jan Brosius
Tue, 2 May 2000 10:14:40 +0200, Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Hi,
Is it possible to interrogate the typechecker
from within a Haskell program
Friendly
Jan Brosius
ll program?
Could this be put on the wishlist?
Friendly
Jan Brosius
Hi,
I wonder if it is possible to simulate a doubly linked list in
Haskell.
Friendly
Jan Brosius
in a monad you can implement a doubly
linked list directly.
please show me how to implement using mutable state in
a monad
Friendly
Jan Brosius
is the type given to newVar v by
the typechecker?
Friendly
Jan Brosius
On 26-Apr-2000, Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
First I give the following primitive operations
newVar :: a - ST s (MutVar s a)
readVar :: MutVar s a - ST s a
writeVar :: MutVar s a - a - ST s ()
Next consider the function
f
t afreedom, whether one lives inAfghanistan
orelsewhere.1. Barbara Jakschik, PHD, Rome,
Italy 2. Carol L. Story, Buckhannon, West Virginia
3. James B. McCafferty, Buckhannon, West Virginia 4. Lynne
Snyder, Belington, WV 5. Jan Brosius PhD, Rotselaar ,
BELGIUM
PLEASE COPY this email on to a new mes
Thanks for this workaround, it worked.
This might be a tip to be put on the mailing list, since
other people using Windows NT and Winzip might have the
same problem.
Friendly
Jan Brosius
- Original Message -
From: Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Jan Brosius' [EMAIL PROTECTED
tion among types, isn't?
Hoping to get comments
Friendly
Jan Brosius
from the type a - b : you
can never go with substution from a - a to a - b
but the reverse is possible.
Also if f was defined as
f :: a - b
f x = x
wouldn't the typechecker complain?
Friendly
Jan
then readVar v will have type "ST s Bool".
the article sais " s is free " . So my question is why hasn't readVar v
the
type " forall s ( ST s Bool) " ?
Thanks
Jan Brosius
- Original Message -
From: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2000 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: a problem concerning a paper
Mon, 20 Mar 2000 14:59:26 +0100, Jan Brosius
[EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
let v = runst (newVar True
- Original Message -
From: Ketil Malde [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; S.D.Mechveliani [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: speed of compiled Haskell code.
"Jan Brosius" [EMAIL PROTECT
Jan Brosius
readVar v will have type "ST s Bool".
the article sais " s is free " . So my question is why hasn't readVar v
the
type " forall s ( ST s Bool) " ?
Thanks
Jan Brosius
are improving the performance with an X86 native
backend and adding functionality.
###
But I am not so sure.
It is easy to mistake with such comparison.
Cheers
Jan Brosius
or in
datastructures are ? times slower than C.
Please correct me where I am wrong and fill in the required number for the ?
sign above
Friendly
Jan Brosius
as strictness.
What about Haskell 98 versus (I anticipate) Haskell 2
Thanks
Jan Brosius
Does anyone know if this below situation is as bad in say SMLNJ or OCAML?
JanBrosius
- Original Message -
From: Jan Kort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: records in Haskell
Simon Marlow
Hi,
compared with Ocaml and SML , Haskell is a more sophisticated and more
elegant language. Does anybody know how efficient the Haskell compiler is
with regards to impure functional languages.
Thanks
Jan
]
To: Jan Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 6:31 PM
Subject: Re: typing error?
Jan Brosius wrote:
I have read the online postscript paper " Lazy Functional State
Threads".
I think the typing (page 4)
f :: MutVar s a - Mutvar s a
is wr
Hi,
will Haskell compiled programs be faster by using more strictness
annotations; I especially think of Clean where strictness annotations are
"abundantly" used?
Thanks
Jan
Hi,
I have read the online postscript paper " Lazy Functional State Threads".
I think the typing (page 4)
f :: MutVar s a - Mutvar s a
is wrong, since the definition of f is :
f v = runST ( newVar v 'thenST' \w -
readVar w)
and since newVar is typed as:
newVar :: a
Hi,
Is there anyone who can explain to me what is meant by second rank
polymorphism.
I have already read all available online documentation.
In logic one has: forall x forall y = forall y forall x.
Doesn't haskell 98 allow in place updating e.g; for records?
Thanks
Jan
48 matches
Mail list logo
