Hi Paulo,
You are teasing me ;^) So what is the semantics of import qualified
Blah?
Regards,
Vasili
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 12:47 AM, Paulo Tanimoto tanim...@arizona.eduwrote:
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Vasili I. Galchin vigalc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
I am working
Hello,
1) I think I read before that there some kind of MPI API (bindings) in
Haskell. Yes? If so, current state?
2) http://www.globus.org/ Globus bindings?
Kind regards,
Vasili
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
so I am fascinated with cool graphics at http://www.globus.org check
out the black hole 3d from Max Plank Institute and imagine ... we did it
with Haskell bindings to Globus API!!!
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Vasili I. Galchin vigalc...@gmail.comwrote:
Hello,
1) I think I
Am Samstag 23 Mai 2009 08:08:42 schrieb Vasili I. Galchin:
Hi Paulo,
You are teasing me ;^) So what is the semantics of import qualified
Blah?
Regards,
Vasili
The qualified names (Blah.foo, Blah.baz) are in scope, but not the unqualified
names foo,
baz.
If you
import qualified
On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 05:30 -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
Answer recorded at:
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Performance/Parallel
I have to complain, this answer doesn't explain anything. This isn't
like straight-line performance, there's no reason as far as I can see
that inlining should
On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 16:34 +0200, Daniel Fischer wrote:
That's great, thank you. I am still baffled, though.
I'm baffled too! I don't see the same behaviour at all (see the other
email).
Must every exported function that uses `par' be INLINEd? Does every
exported caller of such a
On Fri 22/05/09 10:51 AM , John Lato jwl...@gmail.com sent:
Hi Mario,
It looks like the parallelize function is getting inlined when it's in
the same file, but not when it's in a separate file.
Adding a {-# INLINE parallelize #-} pragma to the module with
parallelize recovers all the
Am Samstag 23 Mai 2009 13:06:04 schrieb Duncan Coutts:
On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 16:34 +0200, Daniel Fischer wrote:
That's great, thank you. I am still baffled, though.
I'm baffled too! I don't see the same behaviour at all (see the other
email).
Must every exported function that uses
Hey, we have enough people for a São Paulo Haskell User Group.
Anyone else interested?
Best regards,
Daniel Yokomizo
2009/5/21 Fernando Henrique Sanches fernandohsanc...@gmail.com:
São Caetano, SP, Brazil - right next to São Paulo. UFABC Student.
Fernando Henrique Sanches
2009/5/19
duncan.coutts:
On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 05:30 -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
Answer recorded at:
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Performance/Parallel
I have to complain, this answer doesn't explain anything. This isn't
like straight-line performance, there's no reason as far as I can see
Khudyakov Alexey schrieb:
On Friday 22 May 2009 23:34:50 Henning Thielemann wrote:
So lately I've been working on a little program to generate trippy
graphics. (Indeed, some of you may remember it from a few years back...)
Anyway, getting to the point, I just restructured my program. As part
mblazevic:
On Fri 22/05/09 10:51 AM , John Lato jwl...@gmail.com sent:
Hi Mario,
It looks like the parallelize function is getting inlined when it's in
the same file, but not when it's in a separate file.
Adding a {-# INLINE parallelize #-} pragma to the module with
parallelize
On Saturday 23 May 2009 02:55:17 Antoine Latter wrote:
Or you could go for the compromise position, where the list can be
part of a complex data structure so you're not relying on EOF to find
the end.
Interesting solution however it does not perform very nice. I wrote
microbenchmark
xs ::
On Saturday 23 May 2009 20:00:25 Henning Thielemann wrote:
I think the list should be avoided at all costs, because it is so slow.
I don't know if it is fused away by clever optimizer rules in the binary
package. Anyway, you can treat a Builder like a list. Just replace (++)
by 'mappend' and
You could probably see exactly what's happening in
more detail by going through the Core output.
Thank you, this advice helped. The Core output indicates
that function `test' evaluates the arguments to
`parallelize' before it calls it. In other words, the
call to `parallelize' is optimized
Hello,
Please pardon my naive question: Is there a way to sign on for ICFP
09? The homepage (http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~gmh/icfp09.html) only
seems to mention how to submit papers. Is there a way to attend as a
mere participant?
Thanks,
Matthias.
___
matthias.goergens:
Hello,
Please pardon my naive question: Is there a way to sign on for ICFP
09? The homepage (http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~gmh/icfp09.html) only
seems to mention how to submit papers. Is there a way to attend as a
mere participant?
Registration will be open soon.
-- Don
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Mario Blažević mblaze...@stilo.com wrote:
Does anybody know of a pragma or another way to make a function *non-strict*
even
if it does always evaluate its argument? In other words, is there a way to
selectively disable the strictness optimization?
parallelize
Khudyakov Alexey schrieb:
On Saturday 23 May 2009 20:00:25 Henning Thielemann wrote:
I think the list should be avoided at all costs, because it is so slow.
I don't know if it is fused away by clever optimizer rules in the binary
package. Anyway, you can treat a Builder like a list. Just
Khudyakov Alexey schrieb:
On Saturday 23 May 2009 02:55:17 Antoine Latter wrote:
Or you could go for the compromise position, where the list can be
part of a complex data structure so you're not relying on EOF to find
the end.
Interesting solution however it does not perform very nice. I
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Ian Lynagh ig...@earth.li wrote:
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:18:43AM -0700, Alexander Dunlap wrote:
In the extensible exceptions paper[1], which I believe is the guide
behind the current Control.Exception in GHC 6.10, a SomeIOException
type is discussed so that
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Max Rabkin max.rab...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Mario Blažević mblaze...@stilo.com wrote:
Does anybody know of a pragma or another way to make a function *non-strict*
even
if it does always evaluate its argument? In other words, is
Registration will be open soon.
Thanks.
(I could have written an Experience Report about how I am using
Haskell at Deutsche Bahn, but that deadlines had already passed.)
Matthias.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
matthias.goergens:
Registration will be open soon.
Thanks.
(I could have written an Experience Report about how I am using
Haskell at Deutsche Bahn, but that deadlines had already passed.)
You could add a brief abstract to:
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell_in_industry
As a
Hi,
By the way: Would it be considered good style to include QuickTest
properties into the pidigit submission?
Matthias.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
At Sat, 23 May 2009 19:31:42 +0200,
Matthias Görgens wrote:
Hello,
Please pardon my naive question: Is there a way to sign on for ICFP
09? The homepage (http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~gmh/icfp09.html) only
seems to mention how to submit papers. Is there a way to attend as a
mere participant?
matthias.goergens:
Hi,
By the way: Would it be considered good style to include QuickTest
properties into the pidigit submission?
Not in the submission, no.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
Going through the instances for HTypeable (http://www.haskell.org/HaXml/HaXml/src/Text/XML/HaXml/TypeMapping.html#toHType
) I saw the following instance for Either a b.
My question is, why doesn't the pattern match in the where clause
always fail? If (Left x) = m does not fail, doesn't that
---
Haskell Weekly News
http://sequence.complete.org/hwn/20090523
Issue 119 - May 23, 2009
---
Welcome to issue 119 of HWN, a newsletter covering
By the way, I did submit my solution. It improved the score a bit but it is
still very memory hungry.
- Original Message -
From: Don Stewart d...@galois.com
To: Matthias Görgens matthias.goerg...@googlemail.com
Cc: Arnaud Payement arnaud.payem...@gmail.com;
haskell-cafe@haskell.org
That's fixed in GHC 6.10.2 + though, IIRC.
arnaud.payement:
By the way, I did submit my solution. It improved the score a bit but it
is still very memory hungry.
- Original Message - From: Don Stewart d...@galois.com
To: Matthias Görgens matthias.goerg...@googlemail.com
Cc: Arnaud
On 24 May 2009, at 01:19, Max Cantor wrote:
Going through the instances for HTypeable (http://www.haskell.org/HaXml/HaXml/src/Text/XML/HaXml/TypeMapping.html#toHType
) I saw the following instance for Either a b.
My question is, why doesn't the pattern match in the where clause
always
On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 13:31 -0400, Mario Blažević wrote:
You could probably see exactly what's happening in
more detail by going through the Core output.
Thank you, this advice helped. The Core output indicates
that function `test' evaluates the arguments to
`parallelize' before it
On Sat 23/05/09 4:15 PM , Alexander Dunlap alexander.dun...@gmail.com sent:
Does anybody know of a pragma or another way to make a
function *non-strict* even if it does always evaluate its
argument? In other words, is there a way to
selectively disable the strictness optimization?
It's not good to specify open version ranges in cabal build-depends like
foo = 1.1 because the foo maintainer will eventually release 2.0,
containing API-breaking changes, and the build will fail.
If you depend on foo 1.1, you can specify == 1.*, no problem. But if you
depend on a package that
2009/5/24 br...@lorf.org:
Maybe most of the a.b people are thinking major.minor, and most of the
a.b.c people are thinking breaking.feature.implementation like the
rational RubyGems scheme described in
http://rubygems.org/read/chapter/7#page24 , but I don't know. It makes
it hard to describe
2009/5/22 Maurício briqueabra...@yahoo.com:
The new version of haddock makes use of GHC parser. How much
of effort would take to make haddock generate pretty-print
of the source code itself, (...)
(...) Is this what you want or is there some reason why you
want the code to be pretty-printed?
I'm pleased to announce the hledger 0.5 release on hackage. hledger is
a (mostly) text-mode double-entry accounting tool that generates
precise activity and balance reports from a plain text journal file.
It is a partial clone, in haskell, of John Wiegley's excellent ledger.
hledger
brian:
Maybe most of the a.b people are thinking major.minor, and most of the
a.b.c people are thinking breaking.feature.implementation like the
rational RubyGems scheme described in
http://rubygems.org/read/chapter/7#page24 , but I don't know. It makes
it hard to describe dependencies. Will
On Sat 23/05/09 2:51 PM , Duncan Coutts duncan.cou...@worc.ox.ac.uk sent:
On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 13:31 -0400, Mario Blažević wrote:
...
So the function is not strict, and I don't understand
why GHC should evaluate the arguments before the call.
Right, it's lazy in the first and strict in
On Saturday, 23.05.09 at 17:26, Don Stewart wrote:
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Package_versioning_policy ?
That helps a lot. I should have found that. But putting the policy on a
web page doesn't seem to be working; there are a lot of non-compliant
packages. I guess I'm surprised thah 'cabal
br...@lorf.org wrote:
On Saturday, 23.05.09 at 17:26, Don Stewart wrote:
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Package_versioning_policy ?
That helps a lot. I should have found that. But putting the policy on a
web page doesn't seem to be working; there are a lot of non-compliant
packages. I guess
On Saturday, 23.05.09 at 21:10, wren ng thornton wrote:
I hear they're looking for someone to write a program to check for API
changes in order to detect and enforce the policy :) Care to help?
Yeah, I'm looking into it.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
43 matches
Mail list logo
