Bugs item #1115805, was opened at 2005-02-03 22:19
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by simonmar
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=108032aid=1115805group_id=8032
Category: Build System
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority:
Bugs item #1116210, was opened at 2005-02-04 09:28
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=108032aid=1116210group_id=8032
Category: Compiler (Type checker)
Group: 6.4
Status: Open
Bugs item #1116210, was opened at 2005-02-04 09:28
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by wolfram_kahl
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=108032aid=1116210group_id=8032
Category: Compiler (Type checker)
Group: 6.4
Status: Open
Resolution:
Bugs item #1115805, was opened at 2005-02-03 14:19
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by titus
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=108032aid=1115805group_id=8032
Category: Build System
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Hi,
I've installed ghc-6.3.20050202-i386-unknown-linux.tar.bz2 only to find
out that gcc-3.4.1 seems to be hard-wired into this ghc:
ghc-6.3.20050202: could not execute: gcc-3.4.1
Why is this so. Do I need to install from sources? My current gcc
version is:
gcc (GCC) 3.3.1 (SuSE Linux)
Cheers
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 04 February 2005 12:23, Christian Maeder wrote:
ghc-6.3.20050202: could not execute: gcc-3.4.1
This is because we currently configure the nightly builds to use
gcc-3.4.1, and unfortunately that gets baked into the GHC binary. You
can compile from source to get around this.
Hi,
I've installed ghc-6.3.20050202-i386-unknown-linux.tar.bz2 only to find
out that gcc-3.4.1 seems to be hard-wired into this ghc:
ghc-6.3.20050202: could not execute: gcc-3.4.1
Why is this so. Do I need to install from sources? My current gcc
version is:
gcc (GCC) 3.3.1 (SuSE Linux)
Cheers
| Sent: 19 January 2005 14:42
| Unbound implicit parameter (?global_counter::IORef a)
| arising from use of `get_unique' at Test.hs:17:13-22
|
| Is this a bug? Is there some reason why this is not possible? (and if
it
| is not possible
| shouldn't the documentation be changed to reflect
International M.Sc. Program in COMPUTATIONAL LOGIC
The International Center for Computational Logic at the Technische
Universitaet Dresden is offering a two-year study program, in English,
leading to a master of science (M.Sc.) in computer science. This is
part of the European Master's Program
David Bergman wrote:
Yaron,
This is probably out-of-topic, but: are you, or have you considered, using
the .NET implementation of OCaml. I managed - painstakingly - to integrate
it into a toy .NET project of mine, using .NET Direct3D, and see some virtue
in that combination.
I've been following
Yaron wrote:
I've been following OCaml/.NET integration, and it does seem
potentially quite interesting, particularly in a business
environment like ours where all of the traders use Windows
machines. Which .NET implementation did you look at, OCamIL? Or F#?
F#
I wish there was an
our uniform workbench has a simpleDB binding to BDB.
http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/uniform/wb/
The sources can be downloaded with
cvs -d \
:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/repository \
co uni
and can be compiled with a recent ghc-6.2.2.
The only documentation that I'm aware of is a
(Resurrecting a somewhat old thread...)
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 08:16:59PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005, Chung-chieh Shan wrote:
But I would hesitate with some of your examples, because they may simply
illustrate that mathematical notation is a language with side
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 08:16:59PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
But what do you mean with 1/O(n^2) ? O(f) is defined as the set of
functions bounded to the upper by f. So 1/O(f) has no meaning at the
first glance. I could interpret it as lifting (1/) to (\f x - 1 / f x)
(i.e. lifting from
On 2005-02-04, Dimitry Golubovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Has anyone tried/been successful on developing such a binding?
Funny you should ask. I released one yesterday.
http://quux.org/devel/missingpy/html/MissingPy.AnyDBM.html#v%3AopenSpecificDBM
(Download from
15 matches
Mail list logo
