On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 20:13 -0800, Ryan Ingram wrote:
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Casey Hawthorne cas...@istar.ca wrote:
uj supplied this:
About the discussion
putStrLn (readLn + (5 :: Int))..
I'll write it as the following line,
importing Control.Applicative
main = (+)
Pasted wrong link; I'm using the vim haskellmode, not the emacs haskellmode.
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:14 AM, beo wulf beow...@intamp.com wrote:
I am using:
http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1968
and
http://projects.haskell.org/haskellmode-emacs/
Indenting a single do-block
Erik Hesselink hessel...@gmail.com writes:
importing Control.Applicative
main = print = liftM2 (+) readLn (return 3)
[...] line noise
Why not just:
main = print . (+3) = readLn
Or using applicative:
print = (+3) $ readLn
?
(Which separates the printing from the addition.)
-k
--
If
Hi Felipe,
Thanks so much for implementing the attoparsec-text package.
Could you please add an IsString instance for Parser Text,
parallel to the one in attoparsec? You may have missed this because
of it being an orphan instance in attoparsec.
It should be something like:
instance IsString
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Ketil Malde ke...@malde.org wrote:
Erik Hesselink hessel...@gmail.com writes:
importing Control.Applicative
main = print = liftM2 (+) readLn (return 3)
[...] line noise
Why not just:
main = print . (+3) = readLn
Or using applicative:
print = (+3) $
did you try Debug.Trace?
http://haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/base/Debug-Trace.html
On Jan 25, 3:39 am, Aaron Gray aaronngray.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 January 2011 02:12, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.comwrote:
On 25 January 2011 12:05, Aaron Gray
Let's notify the maintainer to use an ordinary minus sign:
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/ranges-0.2.3
my scan program (http://hackage.haskell.org/package/scan) reports:
Ranges.hs:12:9: undesirable character '\t'
Ranges.hs:12:51: undesirable character '\226'
Ranges.hs:12:52: undesirable
Using the IsString instance for Parser in attoparsec is really nice,
but unfortunately, you can't use it out of the box for the most common
case.
One would like to be able to write parsers in this style:
( * stuff * )
But the types of * and * are too general - there is no way for
the type
Christian Maeder wrote:
Let's notify the maintainer to use an ordinary minus sign
I actually did that two days ago. Other people probably
did too. But I haven't seen any response yet.
-Yitz
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
John Lask wrote:
I have noticed that on my windows box and ghc 6.12.3 I get the return
list for System.Direcotry.getDirectoryContents in reverse sorted order.
This is a change from previous observed behavior and I would consider it
a bug. I would like to verify that it is not just me.
I
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 12:17 +0100, Gábor Lehel wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Ketil Malde ke...@malde.org wrote:
Erik Hesselink hessel...@gmail.com writes:
importing Control.Applicative
main = print = liftM2 (+) readLn (return 3)
[...] line noise
Why not just:
main =
Hi,
I created some code from scratch - probably ugly beginners style - so I'm
keen to get
tips how to make it more pretty and faster
Cheers Phil
import Data.List
-- Input Data
xi :: [Double]
xi = [0 .. 10]
yi :: [Double]
yi = [2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 , 9, 8, 7]
x = 11 :: Double
--
On Tuesday 25 January 2011 22:05:34, gutti wrote:
Hi,
I created some code from scratch - probably ugly beginners style - so
I'm keen to get
tips how to make it more pretty and faster
Cheers Phil
import Data.List
-- Input Data
xi :: [Double]
xi = [0 .. 10]
yi :: [Double]
yi = [2, 3,
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, gutti wrote:
I created some code from scratch - probably ugly beginners style - so
I'm keen to get tips how to make it more pretty and faster
Can you please add type signatures? This would help me understanding.
import Data.List
-- Input Data
xi :: [Double]
xi = [0
Hi all,
I realised that haskell in the base libraries tries to consistently stick to
the permissive BSD license to also give the language traction in the
commercial world.
The H-Matrix and the prelude numeric packages however, which in my mind
cover really important ground work, are issued
Sebastian,
At high level, I understand the notion that thunks are about values and not
nondeterminism computation but I have been missing the isight in the code as
how this happens.. After reading it a few times and trying some
experiments. This is my layman understanding of the problem...
It
Hi Henning,
thanks for the code review -- reason that I don't use the type declaration a
lot -- It causes trouble , because I don't yet fully understand it.
When I declare what I think is right is fails - see Message at bottom -- so
what's wrong ?
By the way I just used lists so far - no
On 26 January 2011 07:32, gutti philipp.guttenb...@gmx.net wrote:
The H-Matrix and the prelude numeric packages however, which in my mind
cover really important ground work, are issued under the resprictive GPL.
I think your description of restrictive is contentious...
Is that only because
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 08:18 +1000, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
Or else because the developers _wanted_ to license it under the GPL.
Some people do, you know.
Sure, but I agree it would be nice to know whether the authors chose the
GPL, or applied it because of linking with GPLed native
Hi Ivan,
thanks for making me aware that this is a potentialy controverse topic. -- I
have highest respect of people writing open source and I totally respect
their decision.
--
View this message in context:
On Tuesday 25 January 2011 23:16:49, gutti wrote:
Hi Henning,
thanks for the code review -- reason that I don't use the type
declaration a lot -- It causes trouble , because I don't yet fully
understand it.
When I declare what I think is right is fails - see Message at bottom --
so what's
Hi,
I've taken a look at your code and refactored a bit to use Haskell's
list functions. The functionality should be identical.
One of the advantages of using the list functions is that you don't
have to worry about an out-of-bounds exception - which is what your
limIndex function corrects for.
The darcs 2.5 package uses the flat -fglasgow-exts, so it picks up
MonoLocalBinds. This causes quite a few errors.
The error messages are particularly bad in
src/Darcs/Commands/Convert.lhs
there is code of the form
explicitlyPolyMorphicFun arg $- \local -
...
very long body
...
On 26 January 2011 09:50, Brandon Moore brandon_m_mo...@yahoo.com wrote:
The darcs 2.5 package uses the flat -fglasgow-exts, so it picks up
MonoLocalBinds. This causes quite a few errors.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.haskell.glasgow.user/19165
--
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
On 26/01/2011, at 11:18 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
On 26 January 2011 07:32, gutti philipp.guttenb...@gmx.net wrote:
The H-Matrix and the prelude numeric packages however, which in my mind
cover really important ground work, are issued under the restrictive GPL.
I think your
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 15:16 +1300, Richard O'Keefe wrote:
You say restrictive like it's a bad thing.
The GPL is *meant* to restrict certain behaviours,
some of which some other open source licences do not.
There's really no need to start a debate over licensing here. Clearly,
the best license
On 26 January 2011 12:55, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
Still, it would be nice to get an answer to the original question.
Licensing with the GPL has definite consequences; for example, that the
great majority of Haskell libraries, which are BSD3 licensed, may not
legitimately declare
On 26/01/2011 1:52 PM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
In which case, why not ask the author(s) directly rather than blindly
asking the mailing list?
others, such as I, may be interested in the answer.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
On 26 January 2011 13:37, John Lask jvl...@hotmail.com wrote:
On 26/01/2011 1:52 PM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
In which case, why not ask the author(s) directly rather than blindly
asking the mailing list?
others, such as I, may be interested in the answer.
Yes, but this way you're
Hi,
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 08:18 +1000, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
Or else because the developers _wanted_ to license it under the GPL.
Some people do, you know.
Sure, but I agree it would be nice to know whether the authors chose the
GPL, or applied it because of linking with GPLed
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 18:55, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
Licensing with the GPL has definite consequences; for example, that the
great majority of Haskell libraries, which are BSD3 licensed, may not
legitimately declare dependencies on it.
What are you talking about? Of course BSD3
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 8:53 PM, John Millikin jmilli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 18:55, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
Licensing with the GPL has definite consequences; for example, that the
great majority of Haskell libraries, which are BSD3 licensed, may not
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 20:53 -0800, John Millikin wrote:
What are you talking about? Of course BSD3 libraries/applications can
depend on GPL'd code.
Not being a lawyer, I'll avoid claiming any definitive answers, and just
mention that that's definitely a minority opinion, and at odds with the
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 21:11, David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com wrote:
I am not an IP lawyer, but this is my understanding of the GPL and it's
transitive relationship with bodies of work that aren't GPL'd.
BSD3 doesn't really state anything about what it links with, but the GPL
injects itself
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 21:51, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 21:41 -0800, John Millikin wrote:
Licensing is a property of the code, not the package; Cabal's
licensing field is only a useful shorthand for most of the code here
is covered by
That would be a
On 26 January 2011 15:48, John Millikin jmilli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 21:39, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 20:53 -0800, John Millikin wrote:
What are you talking about? Of course BSD3 libraries/applications can
depend on GPL'd code.
Not being
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 22:07, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
Voila: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL
(Note: in the past they said otherwise.)
Important: or a GPL-compatible license
BSD3, MIT, PublicDomain, Apache, etc, are all GPL-compatible.
On 26 January 2011 16:10, John Millikin jmilli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 22:07, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
Voila: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL
(Note: in the past they said otherwise.)
Important: or a GPL-compatible
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 22:14, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
However, my understanding that this property is then transitive: if
Foo is GPL, Bar depends on Foo and Baz depends on Bar, then Baz must
also be released under a GPL-compatible license.
It's not really a
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 22:20, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 21:48 -0800, John Millikin wrote:
Please cite where the FSF claims the GPL applies to unrelated works
just because they can compile against GPL'd code. Keep in mind that if
your claim is correct, then
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 22:34 -0800, John Millikin wrote:
The specific claim I'm refuting is that if some library or application
depends on GPL'd code, that library/application must itself be
GPL-licensed. This claim is simply not true. The GPL only applies to
derived works, such as binaries or
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 22:52, Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 22:34 -0800, John Millikin wrote:
The specific claim I'm refuting is that if some library or application
depends on GPL'd code, that library/application must itself be
GPL-licensed. This claim is simply
David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com writes:
BSD3 doesn't really state anything about what it links with, but the GPL
injects itself into the tree of stuff it's linked with via the derivative
works clause.
I'm not an IP lawyer either (thank God), but merely using a published
interface does not
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 08:11 +0100, Ketil Malde wrote:
I'm not an IP lawyer either (thank God), but merely using a published
interface does not make it a derivative work. So IMO there's no problem
with a GPL library making use of a BSD library, nor vice versa - just
like I can write a BSD
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 23:03 -0800, John Millikin wrote:
It's not possible for a .cabal file to specify which license the final
binaries will use -- it depends on what libraries are locally
installed, what flags the build uses, and what the executables
themselves link.
It's certainly possible
45 matches
Mail list logo
