Brian Hulley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I meant even a non-programmer in the sense of even someone who is
not a C hacker to show that the threat of people being able to steal
code from a program is not the only source of problems that GPL could
impose on a commercial application. No
Christian Maeder schrieb:
How about the following simple parameterization?
data Exp label = LNum Int label
| LAdd (Exp label) (Exp label) label
It seems I've forgotten some icing. Usually I provide the following
datatype and function for folding in order to avoid many explicit
2006/8/6, Joel Björnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So far, so good... However, problems arises trying to define the function :
test = toElem myElemYielding the error message : 'No instance for (Show Elem) arising use of `toElem` at ...'
For some reason it seems like the type checker picks the *wrong*
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 10:46:16AM +0100, Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
[...]
The GPL only gets in the way if you put it there by choosing to derive work
from GPL code. Note that most commercial programs do not allow you the
choice of deriving your work from theirs at all. The GPL adds to
Klaus Ostermann wrote:
[...]
data Exp e = Num Int | Add e e
data Labelled a = L String a
newtype Mu f = Mu (f (Mu f))
type SimpleExp = Mu Exp
type LabelledExp = Mu Labelled Exp
The SimpleExp definition works fine,
but the LabeledExp definition doesn't
because I would need something
There is a false statement that must be corrected, about NDA's.
Matthias Fischmann wrote:
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 10:46:16AM +0100, Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
[...]
The GPL only gets in the way if you put it there by choosing to derive work
from GPL code. Note that most commercial programs do
Matthias Fischmann wrote:
But if GPL is stuck to any part of the code and
manages to infect the rest, the client can make you sign as many NDAs
as there can be. The GPL still entitles you to sell it.
Nonsense. The GPL says, *if* you distribute a binary, *then* you also
have to distribute the
Hello All,
Thanks for the many helpful replies to my question about the suitability
of Haskell for industrial/commercial application.
From those I gather there are no licensing problems regarding the use of
the standard functions and modules. Use of proprietary modules may or
not be restricted by
Note that there are many people who will not do work on a BSD project since a
company can just come along and take it. People are free to choose GPL or BSD
for their work and then other people are free to choose whether to derive work
from them.
But this is just the thing, isn't it? The GPL
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 12:57:47PM +0100, Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
To: Matthias Fischmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
From: Chris Kuklewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 12:57:47 +0100
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Not Haskell? (sidenote on licensing)
There
For me library support, for networking in particular, has been the
major hurdle. It gets problematic when too many libraries are still
marked as experimental and only partially implements the specification
(e.g. protocol) that they are supposed to handle. Also after a quick
look at the source for
On 07/08/06, Johan Tibell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having someone pay a group of people to hack on Haskellimplementations would indeed be desirable. Without knowing the detailsUbuntu looks like a promising model. If we could just find a willingbillionaire out there...
If I were a billionaire I'd
Hello Piotr,
Monday, August 7, 2006, 5:29:10 PM, you wrote:
Having someone pay a group of people to hack on Haskell
implementations would indeed be desirable. Without knowing the details
Ubuntu looks like a promising model. If we could just find a willing
billionaire out there...
If I
Hello Johan,
Monday, August 7, 2006, 5:25:34 PM, you wrote:
think that Haskell would benefit from moving some commonly used
functionality such as HTTP, SQL and XML support into the standard
libraries.
http, smtp and other networking protocols - yes. xml/sql is too large
things. actually,
If I were a billionaire I'd love to sponsor haskell development.
Hmm, I'll add it to my goal list ;)
too late - GHC is many years funded by MS Research
I'm aware of that, I was just making a call for more money to deal
with organizational stuff (running haskell.org, creating and
maintaining
http, smtp and other networking protocols - yes. xml/sql is too large
things. actually, haxml package is already included in GHC sources
distribution and i think that it should be excluded from there because
it's too large, far more than any other package bundled with GHC
The problem I'm having
From:
Hans van Thiel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
Johan Tibell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Why Haskell?
Matthias Fischmann wrote:
And it's really not as easy to control as you suggest: If you ever
take in a single patch under the GPL,
This kind of thing doesn't happen by accident. Patches don't magically
creep into your code, you have to apply them deliberately and you should
always know whether
Udo,
us:
mf:
AFAIR this happened to SSH.com with the
bigint code in ssh-v1.3
SSH included GMP, which was licensed under the GPL. Nothing happened
there, only the OpenSSH folks disliked the license and reimplemented
GMP.
... and had to fight an ugly battle over the question whether
Well I understand the free as in free speech not free beer motto, but
suppose person A is talented at writing software but prefers a peaceful
existence and lacks the contacts/refs/desire/energy etc to be a consultant
or contractor, and has had the bad experience of being forced to work
Sorry, I didn't mean to offend anybody, or be misleading. I like GPL,
but I also like the disease metaphor (although is not as much being
sneezed at as having sex with somebody :-).
Then you should think twice before using such metaphors: you end up
propagating hate for something which you
Stefan Monnier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I can't entirely dismiss GNU/FSF/GPL but it poses a fundamental conflict
with the only way I can see of earning a living so it's like a continuous
background problem which drains some of my energy and enthusiasm hence the
length of my rambling post
I've read Haskell: The Craft of Functional Programming on a course on
functional programming at Chalmers (I also took the advanced course)
and now I'm looking for some more reading material. Are there any
other good Haskell books? Is there a Pick Axe, Camel or Dragon Book
for Haskell?
Stefan Monnier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(snip)
Doesn't sound credible. You're free to write and sell a program whose
source code is exactly the same as Emacs's (or PowerPoint for that matter)
as long as you can show it was pure accident
(snip)
It's kind of hard to be sure that you'll be able
A good follow-up is The Haskell School of Expression by Paul Hudak.
Eventually, though, you're going to have to start reading research papers, which
is where most of the cutting-edge stuff is. Phil Wadler's papers (available
from his web site, just google it) are a good place to start, as are
Jón Fairbairn wrote:
Stefan Monnier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I can't entirely dismiss GNU/FSF/GPL but it poses a fundamental
conflict with the only way I can see of earning a living so it's
like a continuous background problem which drains some of my energy
and enthusiasm hence the length of
I'm facing the dark side of lazyness recently.
Typical pattern is like this.
My code was working fine and I was happy.
I just wanted to inspect some properties of my code so
I made a slight chane go the code such as adding counter
argument or attaching axulary data filed to original data for
On Aug 7, 2006, at 10:00 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote:In any case, making a living by selling a program (as opposed to servicesaround that program) is a difficult business. Making a living writing and selling programs for use by a wide audience is one thing. But there is a lot of money to be made by
Brian Hulley wrote:
Jón Fairbairn wrote:
Stefan Monnier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I can't entirely dismiss GNU/FSF/GPL...
Maybe you should thank the FSF for making you doubt:
I know of several good ideas that started out as attempts at
commercial projects but weren't taken up. [...snip]
Klaus Ostermann schrieb:
data SimpleExp = Num Int | Add SimpleExp SimpleExp
data LabelledExp = LNum Int String | LAdd LabelledExp LabelledExp String
I wonder what would be the best way to model this situation without
repeating the structure of the AST.
How about the following simple
Recently, I'm facing the dark side of laziness
-- the memory leak because of laziness.
Typical pattern that I encounter the problem is like this.
My code was working fine and I was happy.
I just wanted to inspect some properties of my code so
I made a slight chage go the code such as adding
On 8/7/06, Ahn, Ki Yung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have posted an wiki article including one example of adding
a counter to count the number of basic operations in sorting algorithm.
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Physical_equality
This was a rather simple situation and we figured out how
Ahn, Ki Yung wrote:
Recently, I'm facing the dark side of laziness
-- the memory leak because of laziness.
The following is the code that leaks memory.
sctAnal gs = null cgs || all (not . null) dcs
where
gs' = fixSize compose $ Set.fromList [TT (x,y,cs) [] | To _ x y
cs-Set.toList gs]
Perhaps your instances will work correctly with this data declaration?
Perhaps it might. But that misses an important point.
The biggest impediment to developing large robust applications with
Haskell is the opacity of its performance model. Haskell is fantastic
in very many ways, but this
Also, we have a large library of research papers here:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Research_papers
mvanier:
A good follow-up is The Haskell School of Expression by Paul Hudak.
Eventually, though, you're going to have to start reading research papers,
which is where most of the
On 8/7/06, Spencer Janssen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Forcing evaluation using (==) is a bit of a hack. Luckily, we have a
better function to force evaluation: seq (which has type a - b - b).
seq x y evaluates x to weak head normal form before returning
y.
Let's try another feature of Haskell
kyagrd:
On 8/7/06, Spencer Janssen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Forcing evaluation using (==) is a bit of a hack. Luckily, we have a
better function to force evaluation: seq (which has type a - b - b).
seq x y evaluates x to weak head normal form before returning
y.
Let's try another
hthiel.char:
And just from a PR point of view, Haskell does project a cutting edge
image. Anyway...
Maybe this is our brand!
Be on the cutting edge of programming language development -- use Haskell
Bored of your language? Try something new. Try Haskell!
Same old syntax? Same old
38 matches
Mail list logo
