On 5 February 2011 02:35, Sebastian Fischer fisc...@nii.ac.jp wrote:
I have not used monad-peel before so please ignore my comment if I am
missing something obvious. The documentation mentions that Instances of
MonadPeelIO should be constructed via MonadTransPeel, using peelIO =
liftPeel
On 5 February 2011 04:19, Anders Kaseorg ande...@mit.edu wrote:
Just to demonstrate that I didn’t use the triviality of ReaderT (), here’s
a less trivial example with ReaderT and StateT:
This is superb, thank you! I would never have come up with that :-)
It still seems to fail somehow on my
Lately I've been trying to go the other direction: make a large
section of formerly strict code lazy.
There used to be a couple of tools trying to make suggestions
when a function could be made less strict (Olaf Chitil's StrictCheck
and another that escapes memory at the moment). Often, it
On 2/5/11 4:26 AM, Claus Reinke wrote:
Lately I've been trying to go the other direction: make a large
section of formerly strict code lazy.
There used to be a couple of tools trying to make suggestions
when a function could be made less strict (Olaf Chitil's StrictCheck and
another that
So I'm working on a project that uses STM to run a lot of things in
parallel without the headaches of locks. So far it's working
beautifully, STM rocks. But there's one snag...
Sometimes I need those threads to do some IO like printing logging info.
I'd like to make these IO chunks atomic
On 2/5/11 4:26 AM, Claus Reinke wrote:
Lately I've been trying to go the other direction: make a large
section of formerly strict code lazy.
There used to be a couple of tools trying to make suggestions when a
function could be made less strict (Olaf Chitil's StrictCheck and
another that
Hi Wren,
maybe Twilight STM is for you:
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/twilight-stm
Sebastian
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 6:46 PM, wren ng thornton w...@freegeek.org wrote:
So I'm working on a project that uses STM to run a lot of things in
parallel without the headaches of locks. So far it's
Hi Wren,
I am maintaining Twilight STM, and it seems that it might indeed solve your
problem. We also use it for logging, locks, and other advanced STM stuff like
inconsistency repair.
If you are interested, let me know. There is a new version coming up soon, with
new features and improved
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 10:46, wren ng thornton w...@freegeek.org wrote:
Sometimes I need those threads to do some IO like printing logging info.
Logging is easy, especially if you don't mind a performance hit.
Create an STM.TChan and throw each log message on it. Have a separate
forkIO'ed
* Marc Weber marco-owe...@gmx.de [2011-02-04 22:35:53+]
hasktags learned about how to recurse into subdirectories itself.
This is especially useful for windows because writing scripts can be
done but is less well known
(http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4865391/answer/submit)
Thanks
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:00 AM, Bjorn Bringert bj...@bringert.net wrote:
I support finding a new maintainer.
Alright; as the old maintainer, I guess it falls on you to advertise
on -cafe and libraries.
Has a request
On 03/02/2011 09:37 PM, Daniel Fischer wrote:
To illustrate your prediction about the side-issues:
On Thursday 03 February 2011 22:10:51, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Consider for a moment the original implementation with Data.Map. Adding
a seq or two here will do no good at all; seq reduces to WHNF.
That got me thinking... What would happen if, instead of Integer, we had two types,
evaluated Integer and possibly unevaluated Integer? What if the strictness or
otherwise of a data structure were exposed at the type level?
Oh, you mean like !Int and Int in Clean? I used to find bang *types*
On 03/02/2011 10:15 PM, Johan Tibell wrote:
First, we need to stop pretending that you can use Haskell effectively
without first learning to reason about program evaluation order.
Writing a program in *any* language without understanding the
performance implications of different language
For what it's worth I saw the problems in your counting examples right
away, without reading the explanatory text below.
Yes, they were pretty obvious with enough experience. For beginners I
expect it to be a rather insidious trap.
Beginners or anybody coding Haskell while not completely
On 04/02/2011 07:30 AM, Johan Tibell wrote:
Right. It can still be tricky. I think we can get rid of a large
number of strictness issues by using strict data structures more
often, this should help beginners in particular. For the rest better
tooling would help. For example, a lint tool that
There's the stm-io-hooks [1] package but it looks like it hasn't been
updated in a while.
-deech
[1]http://hackage.haskell.org/package/stm-io-hooks
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 3:46 AM, wren ng thornton w...@freegeek.org wrote:
So I'm working on a project that uses STM to run a lot of things in
On 05/02/2011 12:56 PM, Jesper Louis Andersen wrote:
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 10:46, wren ng thorntonw...@freegeek.org wrote:
Sometimes I need those threads to do some IO like printing logging info.
Logging is easy, especially if you don't mind a performance hit.
Create an STM.TChan and throw
Tillmann,
I've been looking into you packages, very neat ideas and a nice
implementation really.
I've already implemented a toy example and it worked great. Now I am trying
to use your library in a more serious piece of code, and I've realised that
defineIsomorphisms doesn't support record
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 17:13, Andrew Coppin andrewcop...@btinternet.com wrote:
On 05/02/2011 12:56 PM, Jesper Louis Andersen wrote:
Presumably messages added to the channel appear immediately after the
transaction commits. The problem is, I think GHC's STM implementation might
mean that if
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 8:19 AM, Jesper Louis Andersen
jesper.louis.ander...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 17:13, Andrew Coppin andrewcop...@btinternet.com
wrote:
On 05/02/2011 12:56 PM, Jesper Louis Andersen wrote:
Presumably messages added to the channel appear immediately after
Great! That was pretty fast :)
Are you going to update invertible-syntax to use partial-isomorphisms-0.2?
2011/2/5 Tillmann Rendel tillm...@rendel.net
Hi Ozgur,
Ozgur Akgun wrote:
I've already implemented a toy example and it worked great. Now I am
trying
to use your library in a more
The usual advice on how to store passwords securely is use bcrypt, but
since there seem to be no Haskell bindings for bcrypt, the other good option
is to iterate a salted hash function at least 1000 times. In order for
people to get this right, there should be a library with a really simple API
Have you seen the PBKDF2 library?
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/PBKDF2
Does that look like a reasonable way to store passwords securely?
- jeremy
On Feb 5, 2011, at 8:12 PM, Peter Scott wrote:
The usual advice on how to store passwords securely is use bcrypt,
but since there seem to
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Jeremy Shaw jer...@n-heptane.com wrote:
Have you seen the PBKDF2 library?
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/PBKDF2
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/PBKDF2 Does that look like a
reasonable way to store passwords securely?
Yes, I looked at it before I
OK, now I'm sure I tried it before: I tried switching Haskellers over
to AES with that code change you mention, and it results in runtime
crashes (I assume segfaults, I didn't really look into it too much).
So Svein, please disregard my requested code change, it's a bad idea.
Michael
On Fri, Feb
26 matches
Mail list logo
