Hi Jonathan,
I'm seeing crazy amounts of slowdown in a ghci session after just a few
executions of :r (reload). Using :set +r (revert top-level bindings)
doesn't seem to help.
What version of ghc are you using?
Cheers,
Simon
___
Haskell-Cafe
On 25 June 2012 12:50, Magicloud Magiclouds
magicloud.magiclo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
There was another mail, but the subject might be confusing. So I
write this one. The code is here: http://hpaste.org/70414
If I understand correct, generally, I could use 'type' to do alias
to save the
This release fixes a problem where the GHCi integration
would break when the first command set was from the
debug scratch pane.
Source is in Hackage and https://github.com/leksah
Binary Installers
Use ghc --version to work out which one you need.
OS X
On 24 June 2012 18:46, Alexander Solla alex.so...@gmail.com wrote:
I sort of see where you're coming from. But I'm having a hard time seeing
how this complaint would work with respect to Maybe and the other pure
monads. In other words, I suspect the problem you're describing is
particular
In standard ML you can start doing effect-based things inside a function
without having to alter its type and they type of everything that uses it,
and so on.
This in turn causes a break-down in the type-system where weak type variables
are introduced. We can see the pathological case for
First, why do you think your code is non-optimal?
you don't show your main program, so we don't know what you're measuring.
Just by looking at some types (and not analysing the algorithm):
11 data FilterState a = FilterState {
14 , taps :: [a] -- current delay tap stored values
the State
On 24 June 2012 22:38, Tony Morris tonymor...@gmail.com wrote:
**
Odersky is repeatedly wrong on this subject and specifically for the claim
that you quote, the only response is simply not true.
My point is this.
1. The monadic approach to effects reifies functions into those that are
The class you're looking for is Applicative. The (*) operator handles
application of effectful things to effectful things, whereas ($)
handles the application of non-effectful things to effectful things.
This situation is interesting because it highlights the fact that there is
a distinction
=
Student Research Competition
Associated with the
The 17th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference
on Functional Programming (ICFP 2012) and
Here is the code, I joined two modules in one paste. Both of them
cannot pass compiling.
http://hpaste.org/70418
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 June 2012 12:50, Magicloud Magiclouds
magicloud.magiclo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Bartosz Milewski wrote:
I'm trying to understand Reactive Banana, but there isn't much
documentation to go about.
I haven't written any beginner documentation yet because the API is
still in flux. The homepage
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Reactive-banana
and Stackoverflow
Magicloud,
Try to reduce the particular problem you're having to the smallest possible
example that reproduces the issue. None of us can compile your code, either,
because we're missing many of the dependencies, and unfortunately the issue is
no easier (for me) to track down with the full
s1 ~ sum $ map (sum . flip map [0..n] . gcd) [0..n]
s2 ~ sum $ concatMap (flip map [0..n] . gcd) [0..n]
There are some posts from Joachim Breitner investigated fusion for
concatMap:
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2011-December/thread.html#97227
2012/6/25 Johannes Waldmann
On 25 June 2012 19:04, Arlen Cuss a...@len.me wrote:
Magicloud,
Try to reduce the particular problem you're having to the smallest possible
example that reproduces the issue. None of us can compile your code, either,
because we're missing many of the dependencies, and unfortunately the
Sorry, I forgot that. Magicloud.Map.mapM sure is a helper I use as
lifted Data.Map.map.
If I changed the type of the result of start, the Jobs module
compiled. But still cannot compile with the other module (which uses
start). And the error is on JobArgs.
I post the function here, I am not sure
I wonder why this performs really badly, though (I would expect it to be
the same as s2):
s3 :: Int - Int
s3 n = sum [gcd x y | x - [ 0 .. n-1 ], y - [ 0 .. n-1 ]]
From the links posted by Dmitry, it might be that the code generated is
made of 2 recursive calls: in fact, what I observe is a
Interesting, seems like mapM did not effect the problem
Let me try more with the first argument of mapM
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Arlen Cuss a...@len.me wrote:
Magicloud,
Try to reduce the particular problem you're having to the smallest possible
example that reproduces the
Even more weird, I installed container-0.5.0.0, and now it just compiled!
I will dig more of that. Sorry to bother you guys.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Magicloud Magiclouds
magicloud.magiclo...@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting, seems like mapM did not effect the problem
Let me try more
Glad you worked it out! :) Usually isolating the part of concern in a
mysterious error will help shed light on the source!
Cheers,
Arlen
On Monday, 25 June 2012 at 8:00 PM, Magicloud Magiclouds wrote:
Even more weird, I installed container-0.5.0.0, and now it just compiled!
I will dig
In my test it works ~20% faster than s2 and ~20% slower than s1.
Did you use -O2 flag?
2012/6/25 Lorenzo Bolla lbo...@gmail.com
I wonder why this performs really badly, though (I would expect it to be
the same as s2):
s3 :: Int - Int
s3 n = sum [gcd x y | x - [ 0 .. n-1 ], y - [ 0 .. n-1 ]]
You are right, probably I didn't because I cannot reproduce it now.
Sorry for the noise.
(Anyway, I am still surprised that list-comprehension gives a different
result from do-notation in the list monad.)
L.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Dmitry Olshansky olshansk...@gmail.comwrote:
In my
On 25 June 2012 02:04, Johannes Waldmann waldm...@imn.htwk-leipzig.de wrote:
Dear all,
while doing some benchmarking (*)
I noticed that function s1 is considerably faster than s2
(but I wanted s2 because it looks more natural)
(for n = 1, s1 takes 20 s, s2 takes 13 s; compiled by
On 25 June 2012 20:00, Magicloud Magiclouds
magicloud.magiclo...@gmail.com wrote:
Even more weird, I installed container-0.5.0.0, and now it just compiled!
I will dig more of that. Sorry to bother you guys.
Possibly your Magiclouds module was using a different version of
containers or
My pocket explanation:
While e a function gives one only value of the codomain for each element of
the domain set (and thus it can be evaluated a single time), a category is
a generalization that accept many graphs that goes from each element of the
domain to the codomain. For that matter getChar
Jonathan Geddes geddes.jonat...@gmail.com writes:
Is this a known issue? More importantly, is there a known workaround?
My experience is that ghci (typically run as an inferior Emacs process)
often retains a lot of memory. Thus, I occasionally kill and
restart it. (Not sure if that counts as a
You could try working back from the references in Dorai Sitaram's
Handling Control 1993, which is an important paper in the Scheme
community covering this area.
http://www.cs.rice.edu/CS/PLT/Publications/Scheme/pldi93-s.ps.gz
Shift for instance is referenced back to at least Davy and Filinski's
On 25 June 2012 18:02, Stephen Tetley stephen.tet...@gmail.com wrote:
Shift for instance is referenced back to at least Davy and Filinski's
Abstracting Control 1990.
Typo - Olivier _Danvy_ not Davy
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
We're looking for functional programmers, formal methods practitioners,
and project leads, interested in either short term or permanent
employment. For more information, see: http://corp.galois.com/careers
Why Galois? At Galois, we believe in seeking out and solving important
problems to
Thanks for the responses.
I am using GHC 7.4.1 an Ubuntu.
Shutting down and restarting ghci is my current workaround. I was hoping
for something a bit less disruptive. :kickoffGC or something like that.
--J Arthur
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Ketil Malde ke...@malde.org wrote:
Jonathan
Well,
Monads are something optional at the end. Even the IO Monad is an optional
pattern with unsafePerformIO, but we use it because one of the reasons we
love Haskell is it's ability to differentiate pure and impure functions.
But sadly this is one of the traits we love about Haskell but others
Dear all,
once again, we want to invite you to our monthly Munich Haskell Meeting
at Thu, 28th of June, at 19h30.
This time, the venue will be Max Emanuell Brauerei in Munich
(http://www.max-emanuel-brauerei.de/). Be aware of that change!
Thursday will also be the day of a local football
Thanks, Heinrich. I looked at the examples and at the references you
provided. I understand the semantic model, so I guess I'm mostly trying to
understand the implementation. Conal's paper was mostly about refining data
structures in order to provide better implementation. It's all beautiful up
to
Jonathan Geddes geddes.jonathan at gmail.com writes:
Cafe,
I was watching a panel on languages[0] recently and Martin Odersky (the
creator of Scala) said something about Monads:
What's wrong with Monads is that if you go into a Monad you have to change
your whole syntax from scratch.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Ben Gamari bgamari.f...@gmail.com wrote:
This list is definitely a start. One of the issues that was also
realized is the size of the server's memory footprint. Unfortunately
acid-state's requirement that all data either be in memory or have no
ACID
34 matches
Mail list logo
