Hello,
What if main had a function prototype like:
main :: String - String
And you passed stdin to main as string, and you print the output of main
to stdout.
As long as you run the program with the same stdin, when main calls
'ask_user_name stdin', you will always get the same answer, right ?
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 12:38:25AM -0400, Daniel Carrera wrote:
So, I figure that to do these tasks you heed that do ... - work
around. But that kills the whole point of using FP in the first place,
right?
In my experience, the amount of IO code in an average Haskell program
is from 1% to
Simon Marlow wrote:
But what worries me is: if I just want to check out e.g. Haddock, I have
to get the entire fptools repo (350M+, wasn't it?). I can build a
source distribution with just the bits I want, but I can't get a darcs
tree with anything but the whole lot.
So, here's two potential
Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
In my experience, the amount of IO code in an average Haskell program
is from 1% to 20%, even in applications which have to do a fair amount
of interaction with the outside world (networking, CGI, system utils).
Ok, I can see that. Thanks.
Haskell's IO is not just a mimicry
Ben Lippmeier wrote:
You might like to take a deep breath and start with:
Tackling the awkward squad: monadic input/output, concurrency,
exceptions, and foreign-language calls in Haskell - Simon Peyton Jones
http://research.microsoft.com/Users/simonpj/papers/marktoberdorf/
Ok. And I'll get to
Am Dienstag, 3. Mai 2005 03:48 schrieben Sie:
Daniel Fischer writes:
Due to lazyness, we can have infinite lists (and other infinite
structures) in Haskell (of course, in finite time, only a finite
portion of those can be evaluated), e.g. ns = [1 .. ] :: [Integer] is
an infinite list
Hi all,
Again, I'm the new guy slowly learning this fuctional programming
thing. :-)
[snip]
So, I'm tempted to conclude that FP is only applicable to situations
where user interaction is a small part of the program. For example, for
simulations.
Now, I'm sure I'm not the first person to have
Hi all,
Thank you for all the information on my previous question. I learned a
lot, and good pointers to more info.
My next question is about speed. How fast would you consider Haskell?
(say, for computational work). How would you compare it to C, Python and
Ruby?
I suggest C, Python and Ruby
Greg Buchholz wrote:
You might find the The Great Computer Language Shootout
informative...
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/
Thanks!
That's a great resource. At first glance, Haskell seems to do well over-all.
Cheers,
Daniel.
___
Haskell-Cafe
Hey,
Marcin just mentioned OCaml as another functional programming language I
should keep in mind.
Can anyone offer an opinion on how Haskell and OCaml compare? Is OCaml
as easy to learn as Haskell? Does it have much the same virtues?
I'll go take a look at it.
/daniel goes to Google.
Cheers,
Marcin,
Are you sure that OCaml is similar to Haskell? At first glance, it
doesn't even look functional. It looks like an imperative language.
Cheers,
Daniel.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On 5/3/05, Daniel Carrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marcin,
Are you sure that OCaml is similar to Haskell? At first glance, it
doesn't even look functional. It looks like an imperative language.
It is functional, but it's not pure (ie it allows side effects) and
doesn't have as nice syntax.
Alright, in Haskell there are no side-effects when you call a function
twice on the same data you get the same result...
I just decided I'll try to write a good pseudo random number generator
in Haskell :-)
I'm off to class now, but I'll try it tonight.
Cheers,
Daniel.
On 2005-05-03, Daniel Carrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marcin just mentioned OCaml as another functional programming language I
should keep in mind.
Can anyone offer an opinion on how Haskell and OCaml compare? Is OCaml
as easy to learn as Haskell? Does it have much the same virtues?
I
On 2005-05-03, Daniel Carrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg Buchholz wrote:
You might find the The Great Computer Language Shootout
informative...
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/
Thanks!
That's a great resource. At first glance, Haskell seems to do well over-all.
It's also
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd say that there are probably no features OCaml has that Haskell
lacks that are worth mentioning.
Its type system has some interesting features: polymorphic variants,
parametric modules, labeled and optional arguments, objects, variance
annotations of
On 5/3/05, Khrystyna Mandziy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all!
I'm trying to join to lists of lists. The problem is, i would like to
get a new list of lists of tuples and not list of tuples of lists (that
what zip makes).
list1 = [[1,2],[3,4],[5,6]]
list2 = [[a,b],[c,d],[e,f]]
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:13:04PM +0200, Khrystyna Mandziy wrote:
Hi all!
I'm trying to join to lists of lists. The problem is, i would like to
get a new list of lists of tuples and not list of tuples of lists (that
what zip makes).
list1 = [[1,2],[3,4],[5,6]]
list2 = [[a,b],[c,d],[e,f]]
Hi all!
I'm trying to join to lists of lists. The problem is, i would like to
get a new list of lists of tuples and not list of tuples of lists (that
what zip makes).
list1 = [[1,2],[3,4],[5,6]]
list2 = [[a,b],[c,d],[e,f]]
desiredlist = [[(1,a),(2,b)],[(3,c),(4,d)],[(5,e),(6,f)]]
Prelude
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
...
Its type system has some interesting features: polymorphic variants,
parametric modules, labeled and optional arguments, objects, variance
annotations of type parameters used for explicit subtyping.
It has more convenient exceptions:
Marcin gives a good capsule description of the differences between ocaml
and haskell. Let me add my two cents.
I also learned ocaml before learning haskell, and the biggest single
difference I found is that haskell is a lazy, purely functional language
and ocaml is a strict, mostly functional
Hello,
I hope these don't turn out to be RTFM questions, but I can't find them
in my FM :-)
1) Is there a function to get the ith element from an array?
2) Is there a function to get the index of an entry in an array?
I've implemented these two functions below:
1)
find 0 (x:xs) = x
find n (x:xs)
Michael Vanier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I also learned ocaml before learning haskell, and the biggest single
difference I found is that haskell is a lazy, purely functional language
and ocaml is a strict, mostly functional language.
Indeed.
In contrast to this one, my differences were not
On Wednesday 04 May 2005 01:26, Daniel Carrera wrote:
Hello,
I hope these don't turn out to be RTFM questions, but I can't find them
in my FM :-)
Take a look at this one:
http://www.haskell.org/onlinelibrary/standard-prelude.html
1) Is there a function to get the ith element from an array?
Hi Ben,
Take a look at this one:
http://www.haskell.org/onlinelibrary/standard-prelude.html
Thanks.
What's the Prelude ?
1) Is there a function to get the ith element from an array?
From your own implementations I gather you mean 'list', not 'array'.
What's the difference?
Now, if you happen to
On Tue, 3 May 2005 15:41:22 -0700 (PDT)
Michael Vanier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also learned ocaml before learning haskell,
I'm a long term C, Python and (yuck) C++ programmer who picked up Ocaml
about 9 months ago. I picked Ocaml over Haskell because I thought I
needed objects, but I have
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 12:40:13PM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
That leaves one aspect of Haskell vs Ocaml I don't yet understand.
What are the advantages of lazy evaluation?
The advantage of lazy evaluation is that evaluation order becomes one
less thing you have to think about. The
27 matches
Mail list logo
