This is not a troll, honest, so please bear with me ...
I'm a C/C++/VBA programmer (although the former 2 are several years old
for me), with a sprinkling of Python. Needless to say, I was looking to
see if there were any better ways of doing things. I've given things
like Ruby and Scheme a
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 12:34:57PM +0100, Mark Carter wrote:
This is not a troll, honest, so please bear with me ...
It struck me that Lisp was, perhaps, the Ultimate Programming
Language, the One True Language to rule them all; except that I always
kept abandoning it for one reason or
Hi,
I have a basic question about how output types are reported. I'm using
Hugs.
Suppose I have the following, where the type String is predefined in
the Prelude as [Char].
type PropList = [String]
atomicProps1 :: PropList
atomicProps1 = [prop1]
And I have a function on expressions of
Mark Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bearing this in mind, and hoping you can see where I'm coming from, I
think my question is: shouldn't you guys be using Lisp?
One of the early implementations of Haskell (the Yale Haskell Compiler,
now defunct) was written in Common Lisp.
Regards,
Adam Wyner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I really want to get the following sort of report for the type:
negationAtomicProps atomicProps1 :: PropList
GHCi seems to get this right. Is that an option for you?
-k
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 12:34:57PM +0100, Mark Carter wrote:
Bearing this in mind, and hoping you can see where I'm coming from, I
think my question is: shouldn't you guys be using Lisp?
Lisp is impure, weakly typed and has way too many parentheses. Why would
we use lisp? It seems to be
Harri Haataja wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 12:34:57PM +0100, Mark Carter wrote:
This is not a troll, honest, so please bear with me ...
It struck me that Lisp was, perhaps, the Ultimate Programming
Language, the One True Language to rule them all; except that I always
kept abandoning it for
On 16/09/05, Mark Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not a troll, honest, so please bear with me ...
I'm a C/C++/VBA programmer (although the former 2 are several years old
for me), with a sprinkling of Python. Needless to say, I was looking to
see if there were any better ways of doing
David Roundy wrote:
Bearing this in mind, and hoping you can see where I'm coming from, I
think my question is: shouldn't you guys be using Lisp?
Lisp is impure, weakly typed and has way too many parentheses. Why would
we use lisp? It seems to be lacking almost all the advantages of
I have faced these issues twice, always starting from Lisp and moving
on somewhere else. There's more on my travails at http://
wagerlabs.com/tech and http://wagerlabs.com/uptick.
I implemented a poker engine in Lisp but it appeared that to deliver
it on Windows, Linux and Mac OSX I would
Mark Carter wrote:
The free ones that work on
Windows are GPL, which means that although somebody might be tempted to
use them for personal projects, he is not going to sell the idea to his
boss that stuff should be developed in Lisp.
Nonsense. The copyright notice for GNU CLisp
Hi,
I have some questions about using the empty list in Hugs. In June 2001,
this
was raised as a bug in hugs (see Hugs-Bugs Archives). References
therein to
a bug list on S. Thompson's pages come up a dead end. I haven't found
any follow
up or solution to this discussed. I would
Am Freitag, 16. September 2005 15:06 schrieb Mark Carter:
Plus you can use macros to extend the language.
I don't know really about LISP macros but aren't they a bit like Template
Haskell?
Since Haskell (even without Template Haskell) is a small but flexible language
you can construct
Am Freitag, 16. September 2005 15:29 schrieb Glynn Clements:
David Roundy wrote:
Bearing this in mind, and hoping you can see where I'm coming from, I
think my question is: shouldn't you guys be using Lisp?
Lisp is impure, weakly typed and has way too many parentheses. Why would
we
Am Freitag, 16. September 2005 16:02 schrieb Adam Wyner:
[...]
Suppose I have two expressions:
emptyListA = null
emptyListB = []
emptyListA is apparently a function from empty lists to Bool.
emptyListA is a function from *arbitrary* lists to Bool.
[...]
The problem is that there is
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 12:12:50AM +0200, Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
On 9/14/05, Mark Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem I was having before was that I was trying to create a
separate function onCbEdit, thus:
cbEdit - checkBox p1 [text := Edit Mode, on command := onCbEdit
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005, Mark Carter wrote:
This is not a troll, honest, so please bear with me ...
I'm a C/C++/VBA programmer (although the former 2 are several years old
for me), with a sprinkling of Python. Needless to say, I was looking to
see if there were any better ways of doing
Remi Turk wrote:
No extensions are needed, actually:
cbEdit - checBox p1 [text := Edit Mode, on comand ::= onCbEdit textlog]
^^^
Note the double colon.
Happy hacking,
Remi
Many
Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Am Freitag, 16. September 2005 15:06 schrieb Mark Carter:
Plus you can use macros to extend the language.
I don't know really about LISP macros but aren't they a bit like Template
I wrote a Lisp macro once, and realised that it had a power that I
hadn't
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 02:29:33PM +0100, Glynn Clements wrote:
David Roundy wrote:
Bearing this in mind, and hoping you can see where I'm coming from, I
think my question is: shouldn't you guys be using Lisp?
Lisp is impure, weakly typed and has way too many parentheses. Why
would
Glynn Clements wrote:
Every other language (including Haskell) tends to have the problem
that eventually you will encounter a situation where the language's
own worldview gets in the way.
Or, to put it another way: if Haskell is so flexible, why do we need
Template Haskell? I can't imagine a
I'm experimenting with wxHaskell, and I've got something like:
main = run mainFrame
mainFrame = do -- main application frame
...
cbEdit - checkBox p1 [text := Edit Mode, on command ::=
onCbEdit textlog]
...
where
...
It would be useful to have some convenience function,
Actually, I can see how my requirement of not wanting to pass in cbEdit
might not be so good. From an FP point of view, that's just asking for
trouble. A better solution would appear to be to put the cbEdit in as a
parameter, and just face the fact that all callers will be required to
pass an
Re: [Haskell-cafe] wxHaskell: convenience functions
Actually, I can see how my requirement of not wanting to pass in cbEdit
might not be so good. From an FP point of view, that's just asking for
trouble. A better solution would appear to be to put the cbEdit in as a
parameter, and just face
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 06:30:54PM +0100, Mark Carter wrote:
Actually, I can see how my requirement of not wanting to pass in cbEdit
might not be so good. From an FP point of view, that's just asking for
trouble. A better solution would appear to be to put the cbEdit in as a
parameter, and
Hello Wolfgang,
Friday, September 16, 2005, 6:30:45 PM, you wrote:
WJ more functional. Strong typing may be too restricting if the type system is
WJ not powerful enough. But since Haskell's type system is very powerful, I
WJ practically never miss dynamic typing.
really, we have dunamic
Hello Mark,
Friday, September 16, 2005, 7:42:46 PM, you wrote:
MC facilities. All I know is, if Haskell Templates provide no greater power
MC than those of C++, be prepared for the Lispers to be, shall we say,
MC somewhat condescending about them. ;)
Template Haskell has nothing common with C
Hi,
I have been using Haskell for a few weeks now and I can say that I
am totally impressed by how easy it is to program with it. I am now
doing some small exercises to get used to the language syntax and I have
a little (newbie) question:
Suppose I declare a function foo like:
That's exactly what i was looking for. Thank you very much !!!
Cheers,
André
ChrisK wrote:
There is the flip function which changes the order of the first 2
parameters
Prelude :t flip
flip :: forall c a b. (a - b - c) - b - a - c
So I think
map ( (flip foo) 5 ) my_list_of_lists_of_doubles
Microsoft has announced the following:
Developers can also expect a new scripting language for management
applications, called Monad. Monad is an object-oriented language
based on .NET, and provides command-line based management while
enabling management services to be passed
If I am running a server interactively. (using ghci).
Is there any way to kill its running threads without terminating the
interpreter?
-Alex-
__
S. Alexander Jacobson tel:917-770-6565 http://alexjacobson.com
So I think
map ( (flip foo) 5 ) my_list_of_lists_of_doubles
will work, as will using a lambda expression
map (\x - foo x 5) may_list_of_lists_of_doubles
I really like the `foo` syntax.
map (`foo` 5) my_list
also works, without an auxiliary function and without a lambda. In
reality this
On Sep 16, 2005, at 6:26 PM, Glynn Clements wrote:
Haskell's safety and
consistency can get in the way, while Lisp's freedom can be quite
unsafe and inconsistent.
I have many years of experience designing and implementing commercial
software in lisp and I strongly agree with the second
Dear you all,
Currently, I am working with GXL file (Graph eXchange Language). GXL
is a sublanguage of XML and its syntax is based XML DTD.
In my work, I use GXL representation to represent a quantification:
forall(x:Z|x = 3 and x^2 - 3x + 2 =0)
My objective is to write a Haskell module
Dear you all,
Currently, I am working with Haskell and GXL file (Graph eXchange Language). GXL
is a sublanguage of XML and its syntax is based on XML DTD.
1) In my work, I use GXL representation to represent a quantification
(e.g. forall(x:Z|x = 3 and x^2 - 3x + 2 =0))
2) My objective is to
Hello everyone,
I'm a Haskell newbie trying out various programs from the web. I'm
trying to compile one called bjpop-ray (from Bernie Pope, I think) and
I hit this at link-time:
ghc --make -O0 -package wx Main.hs -o bjpop-ray
Chasing modules from: Main.hs
Skipping Data (
Hello,
Is it possible to overload (==) to a type other than a - a - Bool?
I have an abstract datatype that somewhat behaves like a C integer: a
comparison returns a boolean represented as the same datatype:
(==) :: my_type - my_type - my_type
Thanks for any help!
-Tom
You would have to preempt the Standard Prelude. For ghc there is a
command line switch I have neer used: -fno-implicit-prelude
See section 7.3.5 in the GHC user's guide for more.
There are some internal caveats:
However, the standard Prelude Eq class is still used for the equality
test
On 16/09/05, Tom Hawkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Is it possible to overload (==) to a type other than a - a - Bool?
I have an abstract datatype that somewhat behaves like a C integer: a
comparison returns a boolean represented as the same datatype:
(==) :: my_type - my_type -
39 matches
Mail list logo
