Hello!
On Fri, Oct 23, 1998 at 01:44:58PM +0200, Johannes Waldmann wrote:
> > Your thought would destroy equational reasoning! For example you
> > would be able to define different equalties on the same data
> > structure. So Red==Black could be False in one place and True
> > in another place.
Philip Wadler wrote:
> By the way, FFTW although written in C, was generated by a functional
> program written in Caml. You can find more details on the web page
I asked the authors (Steven Johnson and Matteo Frigo from MIT) a few
months ago why they chose Objective Caml over SML, Haskell, and S
On Sat, 24 Oct 1998, Philip Wadler wrote:
> I was planning to try similar things you have mentioned
> on your page, such as interfacing to "the fastest FFT in
> the West" (FFTW) via GreenCard, ...
>
> By the way, FFTW although written in C, was generated by a functional
> pro
Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Consider the function
>
> t :: T a => T a -> T a
>
> I think that it's far from clear what each of the T's mean!
> Worse, in Haskell 2 we'll also have
>
> t :: T T => T a -> T a
>
> In (T T) one is class and the other is a type cons
I was planning to try similar things you have mentioned
on your page, such as interfacing to "the fastest FFT in
the West" (FFTW) via GreenCard, ...
By the way, FFTW although written in C, was generated by a functional
program written in Caml. You can find more details on
Fergus Henderson writes:
No, different uids don't work fine in the multiprogrammer case.
The programmer that is compiling the source code needs read access
to all of it (for using tools like `grep', if nothing else). Once
he has that read access, nothing prevents him from violating t