Re: [Haskell-cafe] NaN as Integer value

On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Kim-Ee Yeoh wrote: > On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 3:28 PM, wren ng thornton wrote: >> Whereas the problematic >> values due to infinities are overspecified, so no matter which answer you >> pick it's guaranteed to be the wrong answer half the time. >> >> Part of this w

Re: [Haskell-cafe] C++ class = neutered (haskell class + haskell existential)

John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | I was mainly specifically comparing haskell to standard OOP classes, | | Most OOP languages certainly have some set of other features in addition, | such as forms of ad hoc polymorphism or the template meta-language of | C++, or the code reuse primitives

Re: Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] C++ class = neutered (haskell class + haskell existential)

Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Hello Gabriel, | | Sunday, August 20, 2006, 8:26:30 AM, you wrote: | | > | There is a major difference though, in C++ (or java, or sather, or c#, | > | etc..) the dictionary is always attached to the value, the actual class | > | data type you pass a

Re: [Haskell-cafe] C++ class = neutered (haskell class + haskell existential)

Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Hello John, | | Friday, August 18, 2006, 5:16:45 AM, you wrote: | | > There is a major difference though, in C++ (or java, or sather, or c#, | > etc..) the dictionary is always attached to the value, the actual class | > data type you pass around. in

Re: Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] C++ class = neutered (haskell class + haskell existential)

Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Hello Thomas, | | Friday, August 18, 2006, 7:57:13 AM, you wrote: | | >> There is a major difference though, in C++ (or java, or sather, or c#, | >> etc..) the dictionary is always attached to the value, the actual class | >> data type you pass aroun

Re: [Haskell-cafe] C++ class = neutered (haskell class + haskell existential)

John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 08:36:28PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: | > Roughly Haskell type classes correspond to parameterized abstract | > classes in C++ (i.e. class templates with virtual functions | > representing the operati

Re: OOP vs type classes Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] type gurus, can you please help?

Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Hello Gabriel, | | Tuesday, August 15, 2006, 10:36:28 PM, you wrote: | | > | Moreover, Haskell type classes supports inheritance. Run-time | > | polymorphism together with inheritance are often seen as OOP | > | distinctive points, so during long tim

Re: [Haskell-cafe] type gurus, can you please help?

Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] | Moreover, Haskell type classes supports inheritance. Run-time | polymorphism together with inheritance are often seen as OOP | distinctive points, so during long time i considered type classes as a | form of OOP implementation. but that's wrong!

Re: Preventing/handling space leaks

Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Even the C++ standard library itself, which has been | subject to review by the world's best C++ experts, suffers | from exception safety problems. A new exception safety | problem with std::auto_ptr was discovered just last Friday! See |