G'day.
Quoting Janis Voigtlaender [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hmm, but I can easily define an instance of Eq that does not satisfy
this invariant. And I want the generated free theorem to be true for any
legal Haskell program.
I would think that if x == y isn't the same as not (x /= y) for some
type,
On Oct 17, 2007, at 6:11 PM, Stefan O'Rear wrote:
Just to be precise about it, though, there's nothing about Haskell
per se
that causes trouble with fork, right? This is a GHC
implementation issue.
Forking in the presense of multiple threads is a semantic nightmare.
Anything any Haskell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
G'day.
Quoting Janis Voigtlaender [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hmm, but I can easily define an instance of Eq that does not satisfy
this invariant. And I want the generated free theorem to be true for any
legal Haskell program.
I would think that if x == y isn't the same as
On 10/17/07, Janis Voigtlaender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, it is quite natural to take this stand. But as you say, there is
no such commitment in the language definition. And even if there were, I
doubt it would be possible to enforce such invariants in a compiler. So
there would be
[Sorry, I guess this should have been in the cafe ...]
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
The trouble is that
a) the coverage condition ensures that everything is well behaved
b) but it's too restrictive for some uses of FDs, notably the MTL library
c) there are many possibilities for more generous
Ryan Ingram wrote:
These invariants are basically impossible to enforce by the compiler,
but nonetheless certain classes have laws which are expected to hold,
and I would not be surprised if (for example) GHC optimization RULES
depended on them.
I, in fact, would be surprised if there were
Thomas Hartman wrote:
Since I'm interested in the stack overflow issue, and getting acquainted
with quickcheck, I thought I would take this opportunity to compare your
ordTable with some code Yitzchak Gale posted earlier, against Ham's
original problem.
As far as I can tell, they're the
Mark P Jones writes:
[Sorry, I guess this should have been in the cafe ...]
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
The trouble is that
a) the coverage condition ensures that everything is well behaved
b) but it's too restrictive for some uses of FDs, notably the MTL library
c) there are many
G'day all.
Quoting Janis Voigtlaender [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Okay, it is quite natural to take this stand. But as you say, there is
no such commitment in the language definition. And even if there were, I
doubt it would be possible to enforce such invariants in a compiler. So
there would be
Sorry, forgot to add
[2]
http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~sulzmann/publications/jfp-fds-revised.pdf
Martin
Martin Sulzmann writes:
Mark P Jones writes:
[Sorry, I guess this should have been in the cafe ...]
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
The trouble is that
a) the coverage
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:59:41 +0100
Andrew Coppin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well anyway, as you can see, I'm back. Mainly because I have
questions that I need answers for...
Welcome back ;)
This mailing list is the only place I know of that is inhabited by
people who actually think Haskell is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. I was about to answer that the situation is the same with the
monad laws not being valid for some monad we all love, and still we do
not consider the resulting programs illegal.
I do! The H98 report says that all Monad instances must obey the monad
laws. If
Hello,
I believe that this weak coverage condition (which is also called
the dependency condition somewhere on the wiki) is exactly what GHC
6.4 used to implement but than in 6.6 this changed. According to
Simon's comments on the trac ticket, this rule requires FDs to be
full to preserve the
| I believe that this weak coverage condition (which is also called
| the dependency condition somewhere on the wiki) is exactly what GHC
| 6.4 used to implement but than in 6.6 this changed. According to
| Simon's comments on the trac ticket, this rule requires FDs to be
| full to preserve the
Daniel McAllansmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
3. Otherwise, major.minor MUST remain the same (other version components MAY
change).
Is it an option to say SHOULD rather than MUST here? There are
other reasons for a version bump than breaking compatibility.
-k
--
If I haven't seen further,
| These invariants are basically impossible to enforce by the compiler,
| but nonetheless certain classes have laws which are expected to hold,
| and I would not be surprised if (for example) GHC optimization RULES
| depended on them.
|
| I, in fact, would be surprised if there were such
Dan Weston writes:
I find the mathematics is more accurate on
http://www.conservapedia.com
Their facts get checked by the Almighty Himself! ;)
Since decent people here pointed out how my sarcasm may be blessing and
useless, I must ask (living so far from the Bible Belt that I miss all
John Goerzen wrote:
On 2007-10-17, Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that forkProcess doesn't currently work with +RTS -N2 (or any value
larger than 1), and it isn't likely to in the future. I suspect
forkProcess should be deprecated.
That would be most annoying, and would render
PR Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do you trust mathematical materials on Wikipedia?
Generally, yes. Another site you might want to cross check with is
Wolfram Research's Mathworld:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/
-k
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the
I recently bumped into a problem with the feed on my WordPress blog.
The problem was an extra empty line at the top of the XML file which
some parsers choked on. I suspected there was some PHP file that
contained an extra empty line at the top or bottom of the file so I
hacked up this:
On Thursday 18 October 2007 21:15, you wrote:
Daniel McAllansmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
3. Otherwise, major.minor MUST remain the same (other version components
MAY change).
Is it an option to say SHOULD rather than MUST here?
Of course, SHOULD is an option just like MAY is. But both
Dipankar Ray decided to invest himself after my last grumbling concerning
the uselessnes of recalling that Haskell may be presented in schools in
a very bad way.
JK, of course there are foolish teachers out there. I don't think Felipe
was suggesting that this teacher had the right idea, nor
ChrisK wrote:
I disagree with Simon Marlow here. In practice I think Claus' definition of
compatible is good enough:
I don't think you're disagreeing with me :-) In fact, you agreed that
extending an API can break a client:
One can write such a module. But that is only a problem if the
On 10/18/07, Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't believe GHC relies on any class laws. It'd be pretty dangerous to do
so, I think.
Incidentally, I consider it a slight infelicity that the H98 spec
doesn't seem to mention the implied laws of classes like Eq and Ord,
not even to
David Benbennick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 10/17/07, John Meacham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oops, sorry, the version I posted was an intermediate one that had a
different addition algorithm. here is a better one that fixes that issue:
Zero + y = y
Sum x n1 + y = Sum x (y + n1)
note that
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:56:27AM +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Lennart Augustsson wrote,
And Haskell embedded a logical programming language on accident.
Well, we are just trying to fix that :)
Since types are inferred using unification, and classes are still present,
adding
Daniel McAllansmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are other reasons for a version bump than breaking compatibility.
Technical reasons?
Well - say I refactor everything, and use algorithms with different
run-time complexities, and possibly introduce different bugs than the
ones the
Magnus Therning:
hasEmpty s = let
_first_empty = s !! 0 == '\n'
_last_empty = (reverse s) !! 1 == '\n'
in _first_empty || _last_empty
loadAndCheck fp = liftM hasEmpty $ readFile fp
main = getArgs = filterM loadAndCheck = mapM_ putStrLn
The one
Is there some (easy) way to avoid this while still using readFile?
readFile' f = do s - readFile f
return (length s `seq` s)
(and curse the fact that the default readFile is unsafelazy).
Jules
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Hi Chad,
Chad Scherrer wrote:
I think the stack overflows
were happening because Map.insertWith isn't strict enough.
Otherwise I think the code is the same.
They are visibly almost identical - except that you
do an extra lookup to get your strictness, while insertWith'
has internal access and
I wrote:
Nice, lots of fun!
Wouldn't it be more convenient to allow them
to be signed?
John Meacham wrote:
Well, a couple reasons. One is that Natural numbers are a pretty useful
type in and of themselves, often times when used with lazy evaluation.
The other is that it is unclear what
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 12:05:40 +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
Is there some (easy) way to avoid this while still using readFile?
readFile' f = do s - readFile f
return (length s `seq` s)
(and curse the fact that the default readFile is unsafelazy).
:( Doesn't work. I'm starting to
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 20:58:45 +1000, Matthew Brecknell wrote:
Magnus Therning:
hasEmpty s = let
_first_empty = s !! 0 == '\n'
_last_empty = (reverse s) !! 1 == '\n'
in _first_empty || _last_empty
loadAndCheck fp = liftM hasEmpty $ readFile fp
Magnus Therning:
Still no cigar :(
Yes, this is a little more subtle than I first thought. Look at liftM
and filterM:
liftM f m1 = do { x1 - m1; return (f x1) }
filterM :: (Monad m) = (a - m Bool) - [a] - m [a]
filterM _ [] = return []
filterM p (x:xs) = do
flg - p x
ys - filterM p xs
Magnus Therning wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 12:05:40 +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
Is there some (easy) way to avoid this while still using readFile?
readFile' f = do s - readFile f
return (length s `seq` s)
(and curse the fact that the default readFile is unsafelazy).
:(
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 01:16:37PM +0100, Magnus Therning wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 20:58:45 +1000, Matthew Brecknell wrote:
For a less hackish solution, you need to do a bit more work. Again, this
is untested.
loadAndCheck fn = bracket (openFile fn ReadMode) hClose checkContents
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 09:25:32 -0400, David Roundy wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 01:16:37PM +0100, Magnus Therning wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 20:58:45 +1000, Matthew Brecknell wrote:
For a less hackish solution, you need to do a bit more work. Again, this
is untested.
loadAndCheck fn
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 22:58:48 +1000, Matthew Brecknell wrote:
Magnus Therning:
Still no cigar :(
Yes, this is a little more subtle than I first thought. Look at liftM
and filterM:
liftM f m1 = do { x1 - m1; return (f x1) }
filterM :: (Monad m) = (a - m Bool) - [a] - m [a]
filterM _ [] =
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 03:36:01AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside: The H98 report still list the right-zero law as being
a law for MonadPlus, even though most MonadPlus instances don't obey
it. That's actually a defect in the report.)
All the MonadPlus I can think of
On Oct 18, 2007, at 4:57 , Simon Marlow wrote:
depend on API versions (including minor versions) that you haven't
tested, or (b) use explicit import lists and allow minor version
changes only. Incedentally, this reminds me that GHC should have a
warning for not using explicit import lists
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, PR Stanley wrote:
Hi
Do you trust mathematical materials on Wikipedia?
Paul
To a first approximation - trust but verify.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think you mean Philippa. I believe Phillipa is the one from an
alternate universe, who has a beard and programs in BASIC,
The trustworthy articles on Wikipedia have references that can be checked,
and read. The ones without references are not to be trusted..
Dave Barton
- Original Message -
From: Philippa Cowderoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: PR Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Sent:
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felipe Lessa writes:
On 10/17/07, Andrew Coppin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... And it frustrates the hell out of me that 100% of the human
population consider Haskell to be an irrelevant joke language. ...
I feel this way as well,
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 22:58:48 +1000, Matthew Brecknell wrote:
Magnus Therning:
Still no cigar :(
Yes, this is a little more subtle than I first thought. Look at liftM
and filterM:
liftM f m1 = do { x1 - m1; return (f x1) }
filterM :: (Monad m) = (a - m Bool) - [a] - m [a]
filterM _ [] =
But I would expect intTable to be faster,
But if I understand correctly, intTable can only deal with integer keys,
whereas BH's original question would have wanted string keys, and I can't
see a way to convert string to int and back.
t.
Chad Scherrer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/17/2007 11:38
On 2007-10-17, Chris Hayden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello!
I'm trying to build the most recent version of hslogger and have run
into some issues. Below is the error message I receive. (I see that
the same error has come up elsewhere:
David Barton writes:
The trustworthy articles on Wikipedia have references that can be checked,
and read. The ones without references are not to be trusted..
Let's apply (illegally) some recursive reasoning.
Why should we trust Dave Barton? He didn't give any references either!
Which reminds me that it would be nice to be able to ask for a list
of what imports I need to specify (i.e. what names from the module
are actually used). A case in point would be the example of non-
monadic I/O I sent to the list the other day: I wanted to specify
minimal imports, but
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dipankar Ray decided to invest himself after my last grumbling concerning
the uselessnes of recalling that Haskell may be presented in schools in
a very bad way.
sadly, I'm neither the rabbi from minsk nor the one from pinsk. I just
happened to
These two cases could be solved by re-exports, no extra mechanism is required.
yes, good support for re-export would be nice to have. the
reason it has so many applications is that it is a way to explain
connections between providers, apis, and clients to the package
manager.
- consider
Incedentally, this reminds me that GHC should have a warning for not using
explicit import lists (perhaps only for external package imports).
for package-level imports/exports, that sounds useful.
claus
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia -- if not
ordained directly from the Almighty, then at least by his earth-bound
agents!
No, but seriously, I agree with Le Hacker Soleil, news of wikipedia's
inaccuracies is greatly exaggerated.
Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Magnus Therning:
Just out of curiosity, how would I go about finding this myself?
(Ideally it'd be an answer other than read the source for the libraries
you are using. :-)
Well, I can at least try to expand a little on read the source. :-)
You'll first need a solid understanding of lazy
magnus:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 12:05:40 +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
Is there some (easy) way to avoid this while still using readFile?
readFile' f = do s - readFile f
return (length s `seq` s)
(and curse the fact that the default readFile is unsafelazy).
:( Doesn't work.
So add another argument containing all nodes seen in any path, and
maintain that properly. You're going to need to make your DFS
routine
tail-recursive.
The problem is efficiency. I don't know if it can be done in
linear time
without state (and something like arrays with O(1) access).
Haskellians,
Does anyone know the status of SYB3 codebase? It appears that FreshLib
critically depends on it, but the code downloadable from
http://homepages.cwi.nl/~ralf/syb3/code.html dies in make test on the first
test with
lgmaclt:~/work/src/projex/biosimilarity/HS1/Process/haskell/SYB3 lgm$
On 10/18/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Weston writes:
I find the mathematics is more accurate on
http://www.conservapedia.com
Their facts get checked by the Almighty Himself! ;)
Since decent people here pointed out how my sarcasm may be blessing and
useless, I
Brent Yorgey wrote:
Well anyway, as you can see, I'm back. Mainly because I have
questions
that I need answers for...
glad you're back. =)
This mailing list is the only place I know of that is
inhabited by people who actually think Haskell is something worth
Bit Connor wrote:
There should be a WIN32 file with instructions for installing on windows.
Thanks. I didn't spot that...
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Now that I look at it, the report notes that:
-- Note that (min x y, max x y) = (x,y) or (y,x)
but never says that this requirement is mandatory.
That's because the comment applies only to the default implementation,
not in general.
The report does require that The Ord class is used
andrewcoppin:
Hugh Perkins wrote:
You're picking on Andrew Coppin? That's insane. He's got a sense of
humour, and he's a lay (non-phd) person.
Honestly, in one thread you've got Haskell is misunderstood! Its the
greatest language in the world! Why does no-one use it and in
another
Claus Reinke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Incedentally, this reminds me that GHC should have a warning for not
using explicit import lists (perhaps only for external package
imports).
for package-level imports/exports, that sounds useful.
Isn't there a secret key combination in haskell-mode
Thomas Hartman wrote:
Since I'm interested in the stack overflow issue, and getting acquainted
with quickcheck, I thought I would take this opportunity to compare your
ordTable with some code Yitzchak Gale posted earlier, against Ham's
original problem.
As far as I can tell, they're the
Vimal writes:
...
Now, I face some problem which i think is due to Lazy evaluation.
I tried adding strictness in as many meaningful places as possible,
but it doesnt work :(
I have sat with the code for a long time, and yet I am not able to
come up with a convincing reason as to why it
Thank you for that clarification, and I hope you will have patience for
a follow-up question. I am really eager to fully understand this
correspondence and appreciate any help.
Your strong normalization induction does deconstruct function
application but seemingly not constructor application,
I was wondering if anyone had done work on tagging functions at the type level
with their time or space complexity and, if it's even feasible, calculating
the complexity of compound functions.
Any pointers?
Cheers
Daniel
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
I'm fairly new to this and struggling to follow along so I might
be a little off base here...
I assume you mean then that it is a valid proof because it halts for *some*
argument? Suppose I have:
thm1 :: (a - a) - a
thm1 f = let x = f x in x
There is no f for which (thm1 f) halts (for the
The function needs to be total. You seem to be using Haskell to execute
a function to see if it terminates as a proof of totality. Is that
fair? This approach might work for some simple examples, but if the
function doesn't terminate immediately then what? I would assume that
proof of
Tim Newsham quotes somebody /I didn't follow this thread!/:
I assume you mean then that it is a valid proof because it halts for
*some* argument? Suppose I have:
thm1 :: (a - a) - a
thm1 f = let x = f x in x
There is no f for which (thm1 f) halts (for the simple reason that _|_ is
the
It was I that he quoted, and now I am totally flummoxed:
thm1 :: (a - a) - a
thm1 f = let x = f x in x
thm1 (const 1)
1
I *thought* that the theorem ((a = a) = a) is not derivable (after
all, 0^(0^0) = 0^1 = 0), but it appears somehow that thm1 is a proof of
its type.
Help, I just
Hello,
Oleg, Chung-chieh Shan, and others have done some work close to this
area. On this page, see the Monads parameterized by time section:
http://okmij.org/ftp/Haskell/number-parameterized-types.html
Also see this page:
http://okmij.org/ftp/Haskell/types.html#ls-resources
The new type
Dan Weston writes:
... now I am totally flummoxed:
thm1 :: (a - a) - a
thm1 f = let x = f x in x
thm1 (const 1)
1
I *thought* that the theorem ((a = a) = a) is not derivable (after all,
0^(0^0) = 0^1 = 0), but it appears somehow that thm1 is a proof of its
type.
Help, I just
shai dorsai
On Oct 18, 2007, at 5:00 PM, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On Oct 18, 2007, at 19:53 , John Meacham wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 02:31:10AM +0100, PR Stanley wrote:
Do you trust mathematical materials on Wikipedia?
Certainly! I honestly think wikipedia is one of man's
G'day all.
Quoting Janis Voigtlaender [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yes. But actually what we would need would be that it checks as well
that we have implemented at *most* a minimal set of operations.
Otherwise, we are back to the point where I can implement both (==) and
(/=), and in a way that the
First, the suspicion that lazy evaluation may lead to a non-termination
of such algorithm is almost surely wrong, and in any case it is against
my religious beliefs [some twisted smiley here].
Sorry to have clubbed both lazy evaluation and non-termination. I
meant that Lazy eval could have
Some content I have found beneficial in the past when I have stumbled
into misunderstandings:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Assume_good_faith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PR Stanley writes:
One of the reasons I'm interested in
At 01:48 19/10/2007, you wrote:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 02:45:45AM +0200,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PR Stanley writes:
One of the reasons I'm interested in Wikipedia and Wikibook is because
you're more likely to find Latex source code used for typesetting the
maths.
Latex is the one and
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 03:06:21AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stefan O'Rear writes:
... Latex page sources are
infinitely superior to unadorned images of unknown providence.
Of course, most certainly!
But I failed to understand the relation to Wikipedia.
OK, I see. If you look at the
PR:
I think that an email to Tim Gowers would yield LaTeX source for the pdf
articles in his Princeton Companion to Mathematics, in case it has
articles on topics you care about:
http://gowers.wordpress.com/category/princeton-companion-to-mathematics/
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Stefan O'Rear
PR Stanley writes:
One of the reasons I'm interested in Wikipedia and Wikibook is because
you're more likely to find Latex source code used for typesetting the
maths.
Latex is the one and only 100% tool right now.
A lot of publishers use Latex but try to get anything from them in
electronic
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 08:39:04PM -0400, David Menendez wrote:
On 10/18/07, Stefan O'Rear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 03:36:01AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside: The H98 report still list the right-zero law as being
a law for MonadPlus, even though most
On Oct 18, 2007, at 19:53 , John Meacham wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 02:31:10AM +0100, PR Stanley wrote:
Do you trust mathematical materials on Wikipedia?
Certainly! I honestly think wikipedia is one of man's greatest
achievements, and it is just in its infancy.
For what it's worth,
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 02:31:10AM +0100, PR Stanley wrote:
Do you trust mathematical materials on Wikipedia?
Certainly! I honestly think wikipedia is one of man's greatest
achievements, and it is just in its infancy.
John
--
John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 01:58:14PM +0200, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
- Zero really means 0, not 0 or negative.
Actually, zero does mean zero. There is no such thing as negative
numbers in the naturals so it doesn't make sense to say '0 or negative'.
Subtraction is necessarily defined differently of
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 02:45:45AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PR Stanley writes:
One of the reasons I'm interested in Wikipedia and Wikibook is because
you're more likely to find Latex source code used for typesetting the
maths.
Latex is the one and only 100% tool right now.
A lot of
Hi
thank you for all your replies.
One of the reasons I'm interested in Wikipedia and Wikibook is
because you're more likely to find Latex source code used for
typesetting the maths.
Latex is the one and only 100% tool right now.
A lot of publishers use Latex but try to get anything from them
On 10/18/07, Stefan O'Rear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 03:36:01AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside: The H98 report still list the right-zero law as being
a law for MonadPlus, even though most MonadPlus instances don't obey
it. That's actually a defect in
Stefan O'Rear writes:
... Latex page sources are
infinitely superior to unadorned images of unknown providence.
Of course, most certainly!
But I failed to understand the relation to Wikipedia.
OK, I see. If you look at the sources, several pages have the img ...
accompagnied by the
Hi
data Bin = Zero | One
As suggested by someone on this list. It's a really neat idea
although I'm wondering how I can apply this to my int to binary
function. The Zero or One declaration is saying that Bin is a data
type that can hold either a one or a zero. I tried testing this with
a
89 matches
Mail list logo
