> For example, just reading this thread, it sounds like the bogus responses
also really don't like the new release schedule. Maybe the troll wants the
old release schedule back and was just lazy about programming the tool to
vary the stack/cabal question answers adequately.
There is another
bmissions. Beyond what's in the CSV, the only other
> thing I have is (some) email addresses.
>
> Fortunately I wrote a script to output all the charts and tables from the
> survey responses. Once I've identified the problematic responses, I should
> be able to update the script to ign
Sadly, it looks like a Cabal/Stack thing. Of the responses with a country
provided, 618 of 1226 claim to use Cabal, and 948 of 1226 claim to use
Stack. Of the responses with no country, only 35 of 3868 claim to use
Cabal, while 3781 of the 3868 claim to use Stack. Assuming independence,
you'd
etting this
> up, or do you think it should be straightforward?
>
> -g
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 10:18 AM Chris Smith wrote:
> >
> > Good point, Simon. education@ sounds like a good choice, with the
> understanding that we mean education for the general population, not
>
Jones
wrote:
> Good idea. “k12” is rather USA specific. What about
> educat...@haskell.org?
>
>
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> *From:* Haskell-community *On
> Behalf Of *Chris Smith
> *Sent:* 22 October 2018 15:32
> *To:* Haskell-community
> *Subject:* [Haskell-comm
it at all.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-community mailing list
Haskell-community@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
I guess the overriding question I have here is: what is the PROBLEM being
solved? I know of basically no beginners who were confused or intimidated
by the syntax of Cabal's file format. It's fairly commonplace for
beginners to be confused by the *semantics*: which fields are needed and
what they
Have you looked at tagsoup?
On Feb 20, 2014 3:30 AM, Christian Maeder christian.mae...@dfki.de
wrote:
Hi,
I've got some difficulties parsing large xml files ( 100MB).
A plain SAX parser, as provided by hexpat, is fine. However, constructing a
tree consumes too much memory on a 32bit machine.
I second the recommendation to look at Haste. It's what I would pick for a
project like this today.
In the big picture, Haste and GHCJS are fairly similar. But when it comes
to the ugly details of the runtime system, GHCJS adopts the perspective
that it's basically an emulator, where
.
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Aleksey Khudyakov
alexey.sklad...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08.07.2013 23:54, Chris Smith wrote:
So I've been thinking about something, and I'm curious whether anyone
(in particular, people involved with GHC) think this is a worthwhile
idea.
I'd like to implement
Oh, never mind. In this case, I guess I don't need an extension at all!
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, yes. That looks great! Also seems to work with OverloadedStrings
in the natural way in GHC 7.6, although that isn't documented.
Now if only
to add 'import Prelude' to the top of their
code. Am I missing something?
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, never mind. In this case, I guess I don't need an extension at all!
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, yes
for the suggestion!
On Jul 9, 2013 4:20 PM, Aleksey Khudyakov alexey.sklad...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 10.07.2013 01:13, Chris Smith wrote:
Ugh... I take back the never mind. So if I replace Prelude with an
alternate definition, but don't use RebindableSyntax, and then hide
the base package, GHC still
So I've been thinking about something, and I'm curious whether anyone
(in particular, people involved with GHC) think this is a worthwhile
idea.
I'd like to implement an extension to GHC to offer a different
behavior for literals with polymorphic types. The current behavior is
something like:
, Jul 8, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
So I've been thinking about something, and I'm curious whether anyone
(in particular, people involved with GHC) think this is a worthwhile
idea.
I'd like to implement an extension to GHC to offer a different
behavior for literals
+1
While it might work for teaching, it's not reasonable to ask software
developers who want to write useful software to depend on haskell98
instead of base if they want more relevant types.
I'd go one step further and say that we're not just talking about
whether someone is an advanced user
I agree that it would be unfortunate to complicate the Prelude
definitions of foldr and such by generalizing to type classes like
Foldable. This proposal seems attractive to me as a way to reconcile
abstraction when it's needed, and simplicity for beginners. However,
it does seem like a common
of the internet.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Apr 28, 2013 6:42 PM, Alexander Solla alex.so...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that much has to do with the historical division in computer
science. We have mathematics on the right hand, and electrical engineering
on the wrong one.
I've been called many things, but electrical engineer is a new
Oops, forgot to reply all.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com
Date: Apr 27, 2013 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Markdown extension for Haddock as a GSoC project
To: Bryan O'Sullivan b...@serpentine.com
Cc:
I don't agree with this at all. Far more
in mailing list threads.)
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Mateusz Kowalczyk fuuze...@fuuzetsu.co.uk wrote:
I know that this year's projects aren't up
yet
Just to clarify, there isn't an official list of projects for you to choose
from. The project that you purpose is entirely up to you. There is a list
of recommendations at
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 8:51 AM, David Thomas davidleotho...@gmail.comwrote:
Jon's suggestion sounds great.
The bike shed should be green.
There were plenty of proposals that would work fine. `case of` was great.
`\ of` was great. It's less obvious to me that stand-alone `of` is never
It would definitely be nice to be able to work with a partial Category
class, where for example the objects could be constrained to belong to a
class. One could then restrict a Category to a type level representation
of the natural numbers or any other desired set. Kind polymorphism should
make
Ketil Malde ke...@malde.org wrote:
The point of the point is that neither of these are translations of
literary works, there is no precedence for considering them as such, and
that reading somebody's work (whether literary or source code) before
writing one's own does not imply that the
I'm curious how much of the compile twice situation for static and
dynamic libraries could actually be shared. Even if it's not likely to be
implemented in the next year or two, IMO it would make a big difference if
it were feasible to generate both static and dynamic libraries at the same
time
Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com wrote:
That said, it would be great to come up with ways to mitigate the
downsides of unbounded polymorphism that you bring up. One idea I've
seen mentioned before is to modify these extension so that they target
a specific instance of IsString/IsList, e.g.:
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 9:40 AM, timothyho...@seznam.cz wrote:
The thing is, that one ALWAYS wants to create a union of types, and not
merely an ad-hock list of data declarations. So why does it take more code
to do the right thing(tm) than to do the wrong thing(r)?
You've said this a few
I am tentatively in agreement that upper bounds are causing more
problems than they are solving. However, I want to suggest that
perhaps the more fundamental issue is that Cabal asks the wrong person
to answer questions about API stability. As a package author, when I
release a new version, I
Twan van Laarhoven twa...@gmail.com wrote:
Would adding a single convenience function be low or high risk? You say it
is low risk, but it still risks breaking a build if a user has defined a
function with the same name.
Yes, it's generally low-risk, but there is *some* risk. Of course, it
the longhand
version of proc x - case x of.
--
Chris Smith
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Right, it seems to me that there are basically three reasonable proposals here:
1. \ of with multiple arguments. This is consistent with existing
layout, and seems like a nice generalization of lambda syntax.
2. case of with a single argument. This is consistent with existing
layout, and seems
Whoops, my earlier answer forgot to copy mailing lists... I would love to
see \of, but I really don't think this is important enough to make case
sometimes introduce layout and other times not. If it's going to obfuscate
the lexical syntax like that, I'd rather just stick with \x-case x of.
On
Whoops, my earlier answer forgot to copy mailing lists... I would love to
see \of, but I really don't think this is important enough to make case
sometimes introduce layout and other times not. If it's going to obfuscate
the lexical syntax like that, I'd rather just stick with \x-case x of.
On
It turns out I'm filling in for a cancelled speaker at a local open
source user group, and doing a two-part talk, first on Haskell and
then Snap. For the Haskell part, I'd like a list of current places
the language is used in industry. I recall a few from Reddit stories
and messages here and
Oops, forgot to reply-all again...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Problem with forall type in type declaration
To: Magicloud Magiclouds magicloud.magiclo...@gmail.com
On Fri, May 4, 2012
Paolo,
This new pipes-core release looks very nice, and I'm happy to see
exception and finalizer safety while still retaining the general
structure of the original pipes package. One thing that Gabriel and
Michael have been talking about, though, that seems to be missing
here, is a way for a
Hmm, tough to answer without more to go on. I think if I were in your
shoes I'd ask myself where I'm most happy outside of programming. A lot of
good entry level open source work involves combining programming with other
skills.
Are you an artist? Have a talent for strong design and striking
Jerzy Karczmarczuk jerzy.karczmarc...@unicaen.fr wrote:
Le 26/03/2012 02:41, Chris Smith a écrit :
Of course there are rings for which it's possible to represent the
elements as lists. Nevertheless, there is definitely not one that
defines (+) = zipWith (+), as did the one I was responding
simpler than the code in the
question, and that defining a Num instance is possible, but a bad idea
because there's not a canonical way to define a ring on lists. The
rest of this seems to have devolved into quite a lot of bickering and
one-ups-manship, so I'll back out now.
--
Chris Smith
that obeys the
laws, so it's better to write no instance at all.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Jerzy Karczmarczuk jerzy.karczmarc...@unicaen.fr wrote:
Le 26/03/2012 01:51, Chris Smith a écrit :
instance (Num a) = Num [a] where
xs + ys = zipWith (+) xs ys
You can do this in the sense that it's legal Haskell... but it is a bad idea
[...]
It MIGHT be a ring
If you are willing to depend on a recent version of base where Num is no
longer a subclass of Eq and Show, it is also fine to do this:
instance Num a = Num (r - a) where
(f + g) x = f x + g x
fromInteger = const . fromInteger
and so on.
___
.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
than I do.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
about if you're willing to depend on a recent version
of base. Effectively, this means requiring a recent GHC, since I'm
pretty sure base is not independently installable.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http
, but just because
re-implementing the whole front end of a compiler for even a limited
but useful subset of Haskell is a ludicrously ambitious and risky
project for GSoC.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http
implementations than even six or seven at a student
project level.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
we should ideally call them just
effects. But since so many other languages use functions to
describe effectful actions, the term has stuck. So pretty much when
someone talks about side effects, even in Haskell, they means stateful
interaction with the world.
--
Chris Smith
, lazy evaluation
(which can be seen as a controlled benign mutation) is enough to
recover the optimal asymptotics.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
code without ensure.
It will then be interesting to see how that compares to Gabriel's
approach, which at this point we've heard a bit about but I haven't
seen.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org
)
Or, you may want to use a Maybe type for the return... which would
mean there *is* a Nothing value you can return:
tmp:: [(Int, Int)] - Int - Maybe (Int, Int)
tmp (x:xs) y
| y == 1 = Just x
| y 1 = tmp xs (y-1)
tmp [] y = Nothing
Does that help?
--
Chris Smith
Oh, and just to point this out, the function you're writing already
exists in Data.List. It's called (!!). Well, except that it's zero
indexed, so your function is more like:
tmp xs y = xs !! (y-1)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
= case drop (y-1) xs of
[] - (0,0)
Just (x:_) - x
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
that law hold,
and I *think* you'd even keep associativity in the process so you
would technically have a category again. But this hints to me that
there is some *other* law you should expect to hold with regard to the
interaction of Category and Monad, and now that is being broken.
--
Chris
want the unawait to occur.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
can be exhausted, but when it is, idP will
await input, which will immediately terminate the (idP p) pipe,
producing the result from q, and ignoring p entirely.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org
).
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
, looks like idP is still the identity.
Of course, the real reason (aside from the fact that you can check and
see) is that forP isn't definable at all in Gabriel's pipes package.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http
to settle
fundamental questions about the record system we hope to be using in
10 years time is not based on who has time after work for GHC hacking
this month.
--
Chris Smith
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http
be the major concern. But it seems unlikely that claim is
true, since in the very same email you express what looks like a
pretty serious concern about the semantics that will be exposed to
users (namely, the need for a new kind of type annotation).
--
Chris Smith
My first impression on this is that it seems a little vague, but
possibly promising.
I'd make it clearer that you plan to contribute to the existing UHC
stuff. A first glance left me with the impression that you wanted to
re-implement a JavaScript back end, which would of course be a
non-starter
On Dec 31, 2011 8:19 AM, Yves Parès limestrael+hask...@gmail.com wrote:
-- The plain Maybe type
data Maybe a = Just a | Nothing
-- The MaybeMonad
newtype MaybeMonad a = MM ( () - Maybe a )
That's what using Maybe as a monad semantically means, doesn't it?
I'd have to say no. That Maybe
.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
at is that we don't have a formal model of what an
IO action means. Nevertheless, we know because f is a function, that
when it is applied twice to the same argument, the values we get back
(which are IO actions, NOT integers) are the same.
--
Chris Smith
be to define the notion of
doing an action more precisely.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
, the sort of thing meant by the C programming
language by that word. Uncomputable is a very poor word for that idea.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
function on
non-bottom values. Not perfect, but close.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
NOT isolate in the type system. But that's for another time.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
or not is a
matter of your taste); it's directly relevant to day to day programming
in Haskell.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
as trivial as inlining by the compiler (see the ugly NOINLINE
annotations often used with unsafePerformIO tricks for initialization
code for an example).
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman
the effect it
describes haven't been performed. It's exactly that distinction -- the
refusal to conflate evaluation with performing effects -- that is
referred to when Haskell is called a pure language.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
about the RTS implementation, which is of course plenty
effectful and involves lots of destructive updates. It's about the
language semantics.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman
anything except those
expressions that deal explicitly with that type. THAT is why it's so
crucial that values of IO types are just ordinary values, not some kind
of magic thing with special evaluation rules tailored to them.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell
for that.
I've never been able to get wx to build, but gtk works fine. Others
(mostly those using macs) report the opposite.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Matthew Farkas-Dyck
strake...@gmail.com wrote:
Another thought:
Perhaps bang as record selection operator. It would avoid further
corner cases of dot, and it's not unprecedented in Haskell (e.g.
Data.Map.!).
We already have weird syntax rules for dot, and the
On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 17:25 -0500, Heller Time wrote:
unless the machine running the program using time-recurrence was traveling
across timezones (and the system was updating that fact)
Note that this is *not* an unusual situation at all these days. DST was
already mentioned, but also note
Simon, thank you! That makes sense then.
I'd missed the fact that including the entire top-level scope requires
the module to be interpreted. I suppose the right thing to do would
be to not do that; but sadly, that seems to also mean that modules
without a 'module Foo where' only export the
Here's a test case: the complete source code is in the following. I
compile it with:
ghc -package ghc --make Test.hs
The GHC version is
cdsmith@godel:~$ ghc --version
The Glorious Glasgow Haskell Compilation System, version 7.2.1
Then run the application several times in a row.
Here's a version with fewer flags/features, that acts the same.
I tried removing the loading of an external module, and that did *not*
exhibit the problem. It also does *not* fail when the file name is
different each time, so the fact that it's the same file, A.hs, each
time is somehow part of
Thanks everyone for the help!
I'm working now on reproducing this with HEAD, and if I do, I'll write a
ticket. On the other hand, it only seems to be an issue when one is
recompiling a file within one second of the first attempt, and Felipe's
workaround of deleting the .hi and .o files fixes it
Thanks, Simon.
I will work on building a smaller complete test case that reproduces the
issue, and I could have done a better job of at least pointing out the
relevant code for you. Sorry about that.
I'm definitely not building my own IIModule. The use of the GHC API is
as follows. (I'm
.
If there's anything I can do to get more information, I'm happy to do so
as well. I'm not terribly familiar with the flags or options for GHC,
as I've never done this before.
--
Chris Smith
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users
On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 02:16 -0700, Fred Smith wrote:
In seems to me that in cloud haskell library the function's closures
can be computed only with top-level ones, is it possible to compute
the closure at runtime of any function and to send it to another host?
The current rule is a bit overly
On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 00:29 -0700, Donn Cave wrote:
It doesn't appear to me to be a technicality about the representation -
the value we're talking about excluding is not just represented as
greater than 0.3, it is greater than 0.3 when applied in computations.
Sure, the exact value is greater
On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 09:23 -0700, Donn Cave wrote:
I think it's more than reasonable to expect
[0.1,0.2..0.5] == [0.1,0.2,0.3,0.4,0.5]
and that would make everyone happy, wouldn't it?
But what's the justification for that? It *only* makes sense because
you used short decimal literals.
isn't in the list. You don't need
approximate behavior for those types, and if you really mean
takeWhile (= 20) [1,3..], then you should probably write that, rather
than a list range notation that doesn't mean the same thing.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell
On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 12:36 -0400, Steve Schafer wrote:
[0.1,0.2..0.5] isn't the problem. The problem is coming up with
something that not only works for [0.1,0.2..0.5], but also works for
[0.1,0.2..1234567890.5].
A good rule of thumb: For every proposal that purports to eliminate
having to
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 18:53 +0200, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
If you do [0.1, 0.2 .. 0.3] it should leave out 0.3. This is floating
point numbers and if you don't understand them, then don't use them.
The current behaviour of .. for floating point is totally broken, IMO.
I'm curious, do you
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 18:52 +0300, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
Chris Smith wrote:
class Ord a = Range a where...
Before adding a completely new Range class, I would suggest
considering Paul Johnson's Ranged-sets package:
Well, my goal was to try to find a minimal and simple answer that
doesn't
?
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Would it be an accurate summary of this thread that people are asking
for (not including quibbles about naming and a few types):
class Ord a = Enum a where
succ :: a - a
pred :: a - a
fromEnum :: a - Int(eger)
toEnum :: Int(eger) - a
-- No instance for Float/Double
class Ord a =
to add the new methods to RealFloat (breaking
on the bizarre off chance that someone has written a nonstandard
RealFloat instance), or add a new IEEE type class.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http
On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 11:02 +1200, Richard O'Keefe wrote:
I do think that '..' syntax for Float and Double could be useful,
but the actual definition is such that, well, words fail me.
[1.0..3.5] = [1.0,2.0,3.0,4.0] Why did anyone ever think
_that_ was a good idea?
In case you meant
On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 22:09 -0700, Evan Laforge wrote:
Then I tried switching to a fixed point format, and discovered my
mistake. Enum is supposed to enumerate every value between the two
points, and the result is memory exhaustion.
I'm not sure where you read that Enum is supposed to
On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 17:39 +0200, Ketil Malde wrote:
You forgot confusing?
I didn't forget it; whether it's confusing or not depends on the
perspective you're coming from. The kids in my beginning programming
class are using Enum (via the list syntactic sugar) on Float and don't
get
On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 15:28 -0400, Casey McCann wrote:
I actually think the brokenness of Ord for floating point values is
worse in many ways, as demonstrated by the ability to insert a value
into a Data.Set.Set and have other values disappear from the set as
a result.
Definitely Ord is
On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 16:22 -0400, Jake McArthur wrote:
This makes me wonder if maybe the reason this discussion is happening
at all is that we don't have a well-defined meaning for what Enum
*is*.
Certainly, we don't have a type-independent definition for Enum. I'm
not sure whether it's
, so let's just delete it
without regard to how useful it is is very short-sighted.
--
Chris Smith
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 00:04 +0200, Ketil Malde wrote:
If Haskell defined list syntax in terms of something that's not called
Enum, that would be fine. Renaming is never all that big a deal. But
the list sugar is a big deal, and I don't think there's any point at all
in leaving the list
1 - 100 of 234 matches
Mail list logo
