Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
[snip]
Luckily, there is a workaround (discovered by Tom Moertel on
#haskell). If you include field names in the data
definition for which you derive Show and Read, it seems to
work fine.
[snip]
Thanks. I may try this, if I get time.
Luckily, there is a workaround (discovered by Tom Moertel on
#haskell). If you include field names in the data
definition for which you derive Show and Read, it seems to
work fine.
So, in George's example
module GHCBug where
data Command =
NewLocation
| Commit
Sorry, I haven't got time to narrow this down to a test case,
but here are what I hope are the key factors:
(1) We start up applications in a child process (forked with
Posix.forkProcess)
by calling Posix.executeFile, wrapped in an Exception.catch
handler (to detect errors).
(2) Both
Bugs item #610569, was opened at 2002-09-17 07:20
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=108032aid=610569group_id=8032
Category: Documentation
Group: 5.04.1
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Assigned to:
On Solaris:
# /home/ger/ghc-5.04.1.install/bin/ghci
___ ___ _
/ _ \ /\ /\/ __(_)
/ /_\// /_/ / / | | GHC Interactive, version 5.04.1, for Haskell 98.
/ /_\\/ __ / /___| | http://www.haskell.org/ghc/
\/\/ /_/\/|_| Type :? for help.
Loading package base ...
In fact the problem is more drastic than I mentioned in my last message; division by 0
doesn't seem to be catchable at all. From this program
--- cut here ---
import Exception
main =
do
excep - Exception.try (seq (1 `div` 0) (return ()))
putStrLn
George Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
In fact the problem is more drastic than I mentioned in my last message; division by 0
doesn't seem to be catchable at all. From this program
--- cut here ---
import Exception
main =
do
excep - Exception.try
Manuel M T Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
I am pleased to announce version 0.10.16 Altocumulus
Stratiformis Perlucidus Undulatus of the C interface
generator C-Haskell.
The web site
http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~chak/haskell/c2hs/
now also has a binary rpm that is compiled
For parallel Haskell you need the GPH mailing list, not
Glasgow-haskell-users.
You can find details of that list at
http://www.cee.hw.ac.uk/~dsg/gph/
Meanwhile, you're suffering from a compiler version shift: the new
compiler can't read the old compiler's Foo.hi files.
Just rm *.hi
Thanks for the pointer. I still get the following error, when I do gmake.
echo '#!/bin/sh' ghc-inplace
echo exec /root/fptools/ghc/compiler/ghc-5.05 '-B/root/fptools' '$@'
ghc-inplace
chmod 755 ghc-inplace
I'd settle for that kind of indiscriminate flushing -- as is,
trivial I/O examples such as
main = do
putStr What is your name?
ls - getLine
putStrLn (Hello ++ ls ++ !)
fail to behave as expected.
That depends on what you expect... :-) The Haskell report says nothing
about
I have seen this before and it puzzled the hell out of me too.
To be honest I have forgotten the exact cause, but it's something to do
with the fact that you haven't done a new 'autoconf' or a new
'configure' or something.
Much the easiest thing is to start from scratch. Check out an entirely
I agree, I certainly don't want inefficency introduced by unecessary
flushes, and
I would expect to control where the flushes happen. I think the query
originally
assumed a sequencing ambiguity in the IO monad... but in my experiance
(all be it
limited) the IO monad is there to ensure strict
Hello glasgow-haskell-users,
First, it would be good to have examples somewhere around ObjectIO
main page. I've figured out how to download source code for examples
only after third or fourth try.
I know, that the question about examples and source code should be
directed to the
Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd settle for that kind of indiscriminate flushing -- as is,
trivial I/O examples such as
main = do
putStr What is your name?
ls - getLine
putStrLn (Hello ++ ls ++ !)
fail to behave as expected.
That depends on what you
The previous impl had facilities for controlling this - you
could label handles
as being connected (i.e., read() on one caused flushes on the
other.) By
default, stdin was connected to stdout and stderr. If that
turned out to
be troublesome, the connection could be broken (I could be
Simon Marlow wrote:
I'd settle for that kind of indiscriminate flushing -- as is,
trivial I/O examples such as
main = do
putStr What is your name?
ls - getLine
putStrLn (Hello ++ ls ++ !)
fail to behave as expected.
That depends on what you expect... :-) The
Dr Mark H Phillips wrote:
Hi,
Suppose you have some function
functn :: Int - Int
functn i
| i5 = t * i
| i0 = t_ * i
| otherwise = 1
where
t = functn (i-2)
t_ = functn (i-1)
Notice that t and t_ are really local to a guard, rather
than to
Sigbjorn writes:
| Re: your request to have a final look through the report
| for any wibbles that might remain -- Section 11.3.2 of the
| lib report isn't clear on what the expected behaviour of
| (hClose h hClose h) ought to be, i.e., will the second
| hClose fail or not?
|
| Both GHC and
At 3:07 PM +0930 9/17/02, Dr Mark H Phillips wrote:
Suppose you have some function
functn :: Int - Int
functn i
| i5 = t * i
| i0 = t_ * i
| otherwise = 1
where
t = functn (i-2)
t_ = functn (i-1)
Notice that t and t_ are really local to a guard,
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| Re: your request to have a final look through the report
| for any wibbles that might remain -- Section 11.3.2 of the
| lib report isn't clear on what the expected behaviour of
| (hClose h hClose h) ought to be, i.e., will the second
| hClose fail or not?
|
collection. I want to try to force l to be generated on-the-fly
every time it is needed, to see if it improves performance.
What is a good way to do it? Would something like
...
The easiest way is to make it a function
l _ = [ i*i*i | i - [0..n] ] -- for very large n
I
Thanks for the explanation!
On Tue, 2002-09-17 at 19:07, Brian Boutel wrote:
You can't do this because where clauses are not part of the expression
syntax. If they were, expressions like
let a=b in c where d=e
or
if a then b else c where d=e
whould be ambiguous, unless you
On Wed, 2002-09-18 at 01:26, Hamilton Richards wrote:
You can get the effect you're after by using let-expressions:
functn :: Int - Int
functn i
| i5 = let t = functn (i-2) in t * i
| i0 = let t = functn (i-1) in t * i
| otherwise = 1
'where' is part
Dr Mark H Phillips wrote:
Thanks for the explanation!
On Tue, 2002-09-17 at 19:07, Brian Boutel wrote:
You can't do this because where clauses are not part of the expression
syntax. If they were, expressions like
let a=b in c where d=e
or
if a then b else c where d=e
whould
I think this is purely a personal taste kind of thing. First off, though,
only 'where', 'let', 'of' and 'do' induce layout. I've seen many layout
styles; the most common seem to be:
let x = ...
y = ...
z = ...
in e
which is probably a carryover from ML like languages where
26 matches
Mail list logo
