Nathan Hüsken wrote:
Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
In that light, the separation seems straightforward to me. Given the
time-varying values that represent game objects,
bSpaceShipPosition :: Behavior Position
bAsteroidPositions :: Behavior [Position]
bTime :: Behavior Time
On 8 December 2012 03:12, Albert Y. C. Lai tre...@vex.net wrote:
I do not understand the conflict. First you have GHC, and it comes with
bytestring-0.9.2. Then one of two things happen, but I can't see a conflict
either way:
* You request A, but A should be fine with the existing
Is there a way to determine whether a module has been marked safe by GHC
for purposes of Safe Haskell?
The GHC 7.4 docs say that if I compile a module and I don't use the -XSafe
or -XTrustworthy flag, GHC will automatically figure out whether the module
would have compiled with -XSafe and, if so,
* Omari Norman om...@smileystation.com [2012-12-08 08:34:14-0500]
Is there a way to determine whether a module has been marked safe by GHC
for purposes of Safe Haskell?
The GHC 7.4 docs say that if I compile a module and I don't use the -XSafe
or -XTrustworthy flag, GHC will automatically
Continued discussion from
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/haskell-cafe/-e-xaCEbd-w/discussion
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/haskell-cafe/kM_-NvXAcx8/discussion
Thank you for all the answeres and thinkings;
Here's zipWithN for general Zip functors: [1] . This, together with
[2] may
On 12-12-08 07:39 AM, Ivan Perez wrote:
When you install A, you may not know that you'll need to depend on a
lower version of bytestring later on. Cabal will pick the highest
version available (0.10 if present). If a program you install later on
depends on A (needs bytestring-0.10) and ghc
I started with a clean empty .cabal dir. Then I installed some program
that 1) depended on bytestring 0.10 and 2) I needed to compile another
library or program. That's when the problem started. Without using
cabal-dev, I see no easy way to avoid installing bytestring 0.10 when
I need a program
The class is defined as
class (Monoid w, Monad m) = MonadWriter w m | m - w where
...
What is the reason for the Monoid constrait? It seems superfluous to me. I
recompiled the whole package without it, with no problems.
Of course, the Monoid constraint is necessary for most _instances_,
The monoid instance is necessary to ensure adherence to the monad laws.
Cheers,
Edward
Excerpts from Petr P's message of Sat Dec 08 10:59:25 -0800 2012:
The class is defined as
class (Monoid w, Monad m) = MonadWriter w m | m - w where
...
What is the reason for the Monoid constrait?
* Edward Z. Yang ezy...@mit.edu [2012-12-08 11:19:01-0800]
The monoid instance is necessary to ensure adherence to the monad laws.
This doesn't make any sense to me. Are you sure you're talking about the
MonadWriter class and not about the Writer monad?
Roman
Excerpts from Roman Cheplyaka's message of Sat Dec 08 14:00:52 -0800 2012:
* Edward Z. Yang ezy...@mit.edu [2012-12-08 11:19:01-0800]
The monoid instance is necessary to ensure adherence to the monad laws.
This doesn't make any sense to me. Are you sure you're talking about the
MonadWriter
I'm at something of a crossroads, and I'm hoping to get a bit of free
career advice. I really enjoy programming with Haskell (and a few other
exotic languages), and was hoping I could eventually make a living in
that sort of field. Not rich and famous, necessarily, just enough to get
by
Hello,
Sorry in advance for the soft question:
Recently I have been studying more about how a lazy functional language is
designed and compiled and have been reading Peyton-Jones's book
implementing functional languages: an introduction
___
Haskell-Cafe
Sorry for the multiple posts, last time I try to write any decent length
email from my phone...
Anyways, and that was a tutorial not an introduction. I am also reading
his The Implementation of Functional Programming Languages. But in any
case, I'm liking these books a lot! It's super interesting
* Edward Z. Yang ezy...@mit.edu [2012-12-08 14:18:38-0800]
Excerpts from Roman Cheplyaka's message of Sat Dec 08 14:00:52 -0800 2012:
* Edward Z. Yang ezy...@mit.edu [2012-12-08 11:19:01-0800]
The monoid instance is necessary to ensure adherence to the monad laws.
This doesn't make any
* Christopher Howard christopher.how...@frigidcode.com [2012-12-08
13:26:58-0900]
I'm at something of a crossroads, and I'm hoping to get a bit of free
career advice. I really enjoy programming with Haskell (and a few other
exotic languages), and was hoping I could eventually make a living in
SPJ's IFPL is an excellent starting point to learn the innards of Haskell.
It allows a well-acculturated individual to grab the base of the trunk and
start climbing the branches, which means reading the research papers (SPJ's
website, mainly though not exclusively), all the way to the leaves
I should add that IFPL has important chapters written by authors other than
Simon.
-- Kim-Ee
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Kim-Ee Yeoh k...@atamo.com wrote:
SPJ's IFPL is an excellent starting point to learn the innards of Haskell.
It allows a well-acculturated individual to grab the base
Yes sorry, I followed the link off of his website so I generalized a little.
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Kim-Ee Yeoh k...@atamo.com wrote:
I should add that IFPL has important chapters written by authors other
than Simon.
-- Kim-Ee
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Kim-Ee Yeoh
The only thing we can tell from the Monad laws is that that function f
should be associative.
That f is associative is a very small step away from f forming a monoid.
What about listen :: m a - m (w, a)? What laws should it hold that are
compatible with those of the monad and those of tell?
Am 08.12.2012 um 23:18 schrieb Edward Z. Yang:
Excerpts from Roman Cheplyaka's message of Sat Dec 08 14:00:52 -0800 2012:
* Edward Z. Yang ezy...@mit.edu [2012-12-08 11:19:01-0800]
The monoid instance is necessary to ensure adherence to the monad laws.
This doesn't make any sense to me.
First of all, I don't see why two tells should be equivalent to one
tell. Imagine a MonadWriter that additionally records the number of
times 'tell' has been called. (You might argue that your last equation
should be a MonadWriter class law, but that's a different story — we're
talking about
Excerpts from Holger Siegel's message of Sat Dec 08 15:27:38 -0800 2012:
For deriving a monoid instance of w from monad (Writer w), you will need
function execWriter:: Writer w a - w, but in case of a general instance of
(MonadWriter w m) you would have to use function listen :: m a - m (a, w)
Am 09.12.2012 um 00:27 schrieb Holger Siegel:
For deriving a monoid instance of w from monad (Writer w), you will need
function execWriter:: Writer w a - w, but in case of a general instance of
(MonadWriter w m) you would have to use function listen :: m a - m (a, w)
that will only provide
Roman Cheplyaka comments a post by Christopher Howard:
I'm trying to decide, however; should I go back to
school, finish my B.S. and pursue a Masters in CompSci? Or would the
time (and money) be better spent aggressively pursuing volunteer work
for companies, hoping to eventually get the
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Jerzy Karczmarczuk
jerzy.karczmarc...@unicaen.fr wrote:
For me, opposing experience and education is simply silly.
Probably more than 70% of all people would learn much faster on their own
than at school. But, learn WHAT? :
1. Probably less than 1% would
Here it is
:http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/program.php?test=fannkuchreduxlang=ghcid=4
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 15:32:20 -0800
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Help optimize fannkuch program
From: b...@serpentine.com
To: bm...@hotmail.com
CC: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:18
27 matches
Mail list logo
