It would be nice to be able to put foralls in class assertions. For
instance:
class HasIdentity a where
{
identity :: a;
};
class Composable a b ab | a b -> ab where
{
compose :: a -> b -> ab;
};
class
(
forall
Hi,
In general, when working in the IO monad, it guarentees that the order of
operations is the same as how it's specified. For instance:
main =
do putStrLn "hi"
putStrLn "bye"
could not possibly output "bye" before "hi".
What if I don't care about this? Is there any way to tell the
-
METRICS 2002: 8th International Symposium on Software Metrics
** Hotel and conference on-line registration now available**
Focus: Software quality and productivity
Objective: The METRICS conference aims at
Jerzy Karczmarczuk writes:
> Steven Bevan wrote interesting numeric routines a long time ago.
Actually I did little more than transliterate the algorithm
descriptions I found in a book on numerical analysis. I know next to
nothing about numerical analysis so I have no idea if they are
interesti
Use concurrency. That is (I think) the essence of non-sequentiality.
Unfortunately, the frameworks available for concurrent programming in
Haskell are rather unsatisfying (to me at least). It would be nice to
see one that really matched the rest of the language.
David Feuer
___
On Sat, 16 Feb 2002, Hal Daume III wrote:
> The reason I ask is that I'm generating a FSM description file and it
> doesn't matter which order I list the transitions in. I'm curious whether
> I could get the program to run any faster if I don't care about order.
I'm a bit confused here: assumin
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 03:38:59PM +0100, Bjorn Lisper wrote:
> I think MATLAB's matrix language provides about the right level of
> abstraction for a high-level matrix language. You can for instance write
> things like
>
> Y = inv(A)*B
>
> to assign to Y the solution of Ax = B. ...
Just a comm
