[Haskell-cafe] Re: Getting my feet wet - not in Haskell though

2006-12-24 Thread Joachim Durchholz
Tomasz Zielonka schrieb: On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 06:16:03PM +0100, Joachim Durchholz wrote: * Forcing the expressions that get written out means that I cannot use lazy evaluation freely. In particular, if some library code returns a data structure that contains a lazy-infinite subexpression,

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Getting my feet wet - not in Haskell though

2006-12-24 Thread rossberg
Joachim Durchholz wrote: I'll move on to the alternatives - Alice ML and/or Clean. Both can serialize without forcing lazy subexpressions. I don't know about Clean, but with respect to Alice ML this is not correct: Alice ML uniformly blocks on futures upon pickling, including lazy ones.

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Getting my feet wet - not in Haskell though

2006-12-24 Thread Neil Mitchell
Hi (There's still no good introduction to Monads, for example. One that's understandable for a programmer who knows his Dijkstra well but no category theory. And a few other things.) I grasped this one first time round: http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Monads_as_containers No category theory.

[Haskell-cafe] Re: Getting my feet wet - not in Haskell though

2006-12-24 Thread Joachim Durchholz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Joachim Durchholz wrote: I'll move on to the alternatives - Alice ML and/or Clean. Both can serialize without forcing lazy subexpressions. I don't know about Clean, but with respect to Alice ML this is not correct: Alice ML uniformly blocks on futures upon

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Getting my feet wet - not in Haskell though

2006-12-24 Thread rossberg
Joachim Durchholz wrote: To adhere to uniformity, strong abstraction, and the Principle of Least Surprise, we thus chose to force lazy futures in Alice ML. Well, I wouldn't have expected that pickling has an effect (other than wrapping the value up for transfer), so at least I would have

[Haskell-cafe] Re: Getting my feet wet - not in Haskell though

2006-12-24 Thread Joachim Durchholz
Neil Mitchell schrieb: Hi (There's still no good introduction to Monads, for example. One that's understandable for a programmer who knows his Dijkstra well but no category theory. And a few other things.) I grasped this one first time round:

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Getting my feet wet - not in Haskell though

2006-12-23 Thread Tomasz Zielonka
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 06:16:03PM +0100, Joachim Durchholz wrote: * Forcing the expressions that get written out means that I cannot use lazy evaluation freely. In particular, if some library code returns a data structure that contains a lazy-infinite subexpression, serializing it would

[Haskell-cafe] Re: Getting my feet wet - not in Haskell though

2006-12-22 Thread Joachim Durchholz
OK, just to let everybody know why I'm dropping Haskell. Basically, the reasoning is this: * I want to write a process that doesn't terminate. * Since the environment can and will enforce termination occasionally, the process must be able to write its state to some external storage (serialize