Jacques Carette wrote:
-- This does not however help at all! The only way I have found of
'fixing' this requires annotating the code itself, which I most
definitely do not want to do because I specifically want the code to be
polymorphic in that way. But GHC 6.8.2 does not want to let me do
| It's sad to see the OpenGL binding being dropped from GHC binary
| installers starting from 6.10. Though this issue has been brought up
| and discussed before, I'm sure a lot of people who based their work on
| OpenGL would share the same sympathy.
The plan (which we have perhaps not
Hi all,
Thanks for your welcome and helpful comments. I've banged out a first
attempt at a Haskell library and was curious if anybody would have
time or interest in looking it over it for style, design, stuff that's
just wrong, or (most likely) stuff that's been done better elsewhere.
I'm willing
If you want to defer the choice of 's' you've to make it appear in the type
signature of test1, so you've to introduce an artificial parameter even if
we're interested only in its type. e.g.:
data Proxy (s :: * - * - *) -- useful because we can't have an argument
of type 's' directly, since it's
Hi all,
I'm reading the following tutorial:
http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/papers/parallel/AFP08-notes.pdf
A Tutorial on Parallel and Concurrent
Programming in Haskell and have problems getting the expected speed
improvement from running two tasks in parallel. With any version of
the code
On 11/24/08 00:40, Andrea Vezzosi wrote:
It's more natural to consider the cross product of no sets to be [[]] so
your crossr becomes:
crossr [] = [[]]
crossr (x:xs) = concat (map (\h -map (\t - h:t) (crossr tail)) hd)
which we can rewrite with list comprehensions for conciseness:
crossr []
Please help, to locate in GHC distribution SOEGraphics library from
Paul Hudak, book The Haskell School of Expression
(http://www.haskell.org/soe/ )
Thanks!
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
Luke Palmer wrote:
Larry Evans wrote:
contains a cross function which calculates the cross product
of two lists. That attached does the same but then
used cross on 3 lists. Naturally, I thought use of
fold could generalize that to n lists; however,
I'm getting error:
The type of the
Did you try clicking the links on that page you referenced?
There's one labelled software.
http://www.haskell.org/soe/software1.htm
Which shows source code links for SOE.
Dave
2008/11/24 Dmitri O.Kondratiev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please help, to locate in GHC distribution SOEGraphics library from
Which version of GHC are you using?
This particular example triggers a boundary condition in ghc 6.10
where, with only one spark, GHC doesn't fire up the extra cpu. Try it
with 6.8.x to see that in action.
Simon Marlow may be able to comment more.
-- Don
olivier.boudry:
Hi all,
I'm reading
simonpj:
| It's sad to see the OpenGL binding being dropped from GHC binary
| installers starting from 6.10. Though this issue has been brought up
| and discussed before, I'm sure a lot of people who based their work on
| OpenGL would share the same sympathy.
The plan (which we have
http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/HGL
or
http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/soegtk
2008/11/24 Dmitri O.Kondratiev [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please help, to locate in GHC distribution SOEGraphics library from
Paul Hudak, book The Haskell School of
Haskellians,
Some monads come with take-out options, e.g.
- List
- Set
In the sense that if unit : A - List A is given by unit a = [a], then
taking the head of a list can be used to retrieve values from inside the
monad.
Some monads do not come with take-out options, IO being a notorious
2008/11/24 Greg Meredith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Haskellians,
Some monads come with take-out options, e.g.
- List
- Set
In the sense that if unit : A - List A is given by unit a = [a], then
taking the head of a list can be used to retrieve values from inside the
monad.
Some monads do
On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 14:06 -0800, Greg Meredith wrote:
Haskellians,
Some monads come with take-out options, e.g.
* List
* Set
In the sense that if unit : A - List A is given by unit a = [a], then
taking the head of a list can be used to retrieve values from inside
the monad.
A way this analogy breaks down is that lazyness evaluates precisely what
is needed, and no more. The set of values evaluated by lazyness is
exactly equivalent to the set of values needed.
Garbage collectors are conservative by nature, the values collected by
the garbage collector are some subset
Hi Everybody,
while working on my resent project I've noticed that my code seems to be
faster under Windows than under Linux x64.
More exactly this was an AI game evaluator that ran on given parameters. There
was no IO performed. I've run 3 lots of test on both systems and stored some
figures.
bartek:
Hi Everybody,
while working on my resent project I've noticed that my code seems to be
faster under Windows than under Linux x64.
More exactly this was an AI game evaluator that ran on given parameters.
There
was no IO performed. I've run 3 lots of test on both systems and
Jonathan,
Nice! Thanks. In addition to implementations, do we have more mathematical
accounts? Let me expose more of my motives.
- i am interested in a first-principles notion of data. Neither lambda
nor π-calculus come with a criterion for determining which terms represent
data and
Is the windows 32 or 64 bit, a while ago, ghc had trouble producing
efficient binaries for 64 bit intel systems. Something about the
interaction between gcc and the C it produced created some pessimal
assembly output. I do not know how much this is still an issue though.
You could try compiling 32
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 02:06:33PM -0800, Greg Meredith wrote:
Now, are there references for a theory of monads and take-out options? For
example, it seems that all sensible notions of containers have take-out. Can
we make the leap and define a container as a monad with a notion of
take-out?
On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 15:16 +0100, Thomas Hartman wrote:
I have run into another issue with cabal packaging, which seems
related to the issues discussed above. (see attached tar file for
complete example of failure scenario)
If I have a cabal package that depends on two other packages
--
2008/11/21 Robert Greayer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
How does Hackage run 'haddock' on uploaded packages? I had assumed it
directly runs the cabal 'haddock' target, e.g.
runhaskell Setup.hs haddock
but it appears to perhaps be more complex than that.
Some backrgound --
haddock doesn't seem to
john:
Is the windows 32 or 64 bit, a while ago, ghc had trouble producing
efficient binaries for 64 bit intel systems. Something about the
interaction between gcc and the C it produced created some pessimal
assembly output. I do not know how much this is still an issue though.
You could try
- i am interested in a first-principles notion of data. Neither lambda
nor π-calculus come with a criterion for determining which terms represent
data and which programs. You can shoe-horn in such notions -- and it is
clear that practical programming relies on such a separation -- but
Hello,
Cabal allows specifying arguments for tools it recognizes on the
command line, e.g.
runhaskell Setup.hs configure --c2hs-option=some_option
Unfortunately, I can't find a way to make this work with .cabal (or
.buildinfo) files, except for the specific cases of ghc, hugs, and
nhc98
I've noticed that many of the packages I upload to haddock don't build
documentation properly, although the documentation builds fine locally
when I run cabal haddock.
For example:
http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/HAppSHelpers
is fine in my local environment.
I am not
Owen Smith wrote:
Hi all,
Thanks for your welcome and helpful comments. I've banged out a first
attempt at a Haskell library and was curious if anybody would have
time or interest in looking it over it for style, design, stuff that's
just wrong, or (most likely) stuff that's been done better
On 2008 Nov 24, at 17:06, Greg Meredith wrote:
Now, are there references for a theory of monads and take-out
options? For example, it seems that all sensible notions of
containers have take-out. Can we make the leap and define a
container as a monad with a notion of take-out? Has this been
Brandon,
i see your point, but how do we sharpen that intuition to a formal
characterization?
Best wishes,
--greg
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:45 PM, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2008 Nov 24, at 17:06, Greg Meredith wrote:
Now, are there references for a theory of
Claus,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. Let me note that fully abstract
semantics for PCF -- a total toy, mind you, just lambda + bools + naturals
-- took some 25 years from characterization of the problem to a solution.
That would seem to indicate shoe-horning, in my book ;-). Moreover, when
31 matches
Mail list logo
