On Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 11:04:27 +0200, George Russell wrote:
I am trying to get GHC, with the latest PrimOps.h fix, to compile with gcc 2.95 on
Sparc
Solaris. I now have an hsc but it doesn't get very far with compiling the standard
library
because when it gets to PrelEnum.lhs, it
Hi Folks,
I committed the changes to implement threadWaitRead, threadWaitWrite and
threadDelay yesterday[1]. We're seriously considering pulling these over
into 4.04 (for patchlevel 1), but this is dependent on the changes getting
enough testing in the next week or so.
Please try it out!
D.Tweed wrote:
Marko Schuetz wrote:
What I would like to know is: wouldn't it make sense to have the
transformation
f x = e where e does not mention x
--
f x = f'
f' = e
in hugs? Did I miss anything?
What if e if huge (maybe an infinte list of primes) and f x
On 25-Aug-1999, Keith Wansbrough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
According to the Haskell 98 report, patterns have the following grammar:
apat ::= var [ @ apat ]
| ~ apat
| ...etc...
Thus the following program should be legal (IMHO):
main = let foo@~(x,y) = (1,2)
in
Tom Pledger wrote:
Where do units of measure fit into a type system?
In Haskell this should be quite easy. Off my head I would suggest
something like
class Unit a where
unit :: Float - a
value :: a - Float
newtype Metres = Metres Float
I once wrote a C++ template library that did exactly that. Arbitrary units,
rational exponents -- you can have (m^(3/2)/kg^(5/16)) dimensioned value.
All at compile time, without runtime checking whatsoever.
Too bad it took eternity to compile a simplest program.
Things like that should be
I'd like to redirect stdout and stderr to a file from a haskell
program, i.e. I'd like to bracket an IO action with output to stdout
with redirecting stdout to a file before the action and redirecting it
back at where it was after that action.
I've taken a look at Hsh, but it uses Posix which
Good idea. Andrew Kennedy wrote a whole thesis about this, and a
paper or two besides.
http://research.microsoft.com/~akenn/
Unfortunalty this work concentrates on extending a programming language
with units. It would be better to extend Haskell with more universal
features that makes the
I think that the transformation is exactly fully laziness.
Sometimes, it
helps to improve space/time performance, but it needs to be tunned up
due to the reasons including one given by Tweed.
GHC does full laziness(*). As far as I know, no-one ever complained :)
Simon
(*) Well, actually
IIRC, GHC does the tuning, i.e. CAFs are garbage collected in a clever
way (describe in SPJ's book, I think), e.g. if there is only one
reference into the "middle" of a CAF left, only that part is
kept alive.
and not the wohle CAF. Comments from Mr. GC? :-)
True, but this doesn't solve
"D. Tweed" wrote:
Isn't the issue a bit weirder than this in that you've also got pure
numbers which ought be usable with the same operators (*$,etc)
You are right, I overlooked that. But this is not even the most serious
problem, overloading the operators accordingly might be possible with
Not sure it will work... how do you handle
Quot (Prod Metres Metres) (Prod Seconds Metres)
or make sure that
Prod Metres Seconds
is the same as
Prod Seconds Metres
???
On Aug 26, 10:36, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
Subject: Re: Units of measure
Tom Pledger wrote:
After all the discussion of FFIs for Haskell...
Has anyone implemented an HTTP client library that works with Hugs GHC
on both windows and unix?
I suppose, if the haskell-jni stuff is done, that would count, but I am
not sure of its status.
-Alex-
PS. I am really tired of using PHP for web
Christian Sievers wrote:
Anatoli Tubman wrote:
I once wrote a C++ template library that did exactly that. Arbitrary units,
rational exponents -- you can have (m^(3/2)/kg^(5/16)) dimensioned value.
All at compile time, without runtime checking whatsoever.
Is there any sense physically
Anatoli Tubman wrote:
I once wrote a C++ template library that did exactly that. Arbitrary units,
rational exponents -- you can have (m^(3/2)/kg^(5/16)) dimensioned value.
All at compile time, without runtime checking whatsoever.
Is there any sense physically in rational exponents?
If not,
Good idea. Andrew Kennedy wrote a whole thesis about this, and a
paper or two besides.
http://research.microsoft.com/~akenn/
-Original Message-
From: Tom Pledger
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 1999 7:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Units of measure
Hi. Here's a short question which has been bothering me, and a longer
discussion of why. Apologies if it's a rote.
Where do units of measure fit into a type system?
Expressions along these lines should ideally be legal:
(x :: Metres) / (y :: Seconds)
(x ::
On Thu, 26 Aug 1999, Erik Meijer wrote:
Has anyone implemented an HTTP client library that works with Hugs GHC
on both windows and unix?
I know that Sigbjorn has a binding for the W3C libraries, but I think that only
works for GHC.
There is that consistent FFI problem again. I guess
(Cayenne doesn't happen to have c*n-patterns?)
[ ;-) forgotten.]
`c*n' and `n+k' are equally abominable. Cayenne has neither.
I thought they might be nice to express the type of sqrt.
When we have the type as
Unit (mass::Int) (length::Int) (time::Int) = Double
it should be s.th. like
On Thu, 26 Aug 1999, Christian Sievers wrote:
Anatoli Tubman wrote:
I once wrote a C++ template library that did exactly that. Arbitrary
units, rational exponents -- you can have (m^(3/2)/kg^(5/16))
dimensioned value. All at compile time, without runtime checking
whatsoever.
20 matches
Mail list logo
