Richard O'Keefe wrote:
If one is giving a *serious* answer, it has to be an answer a
beginner (who has almost certainly never heard of Traversable)
can make sense of, and if it uses functions that are pretty
much certain not to be in said beginner's text book, said
beginner has to be told
Yitzchak Gale g...@sefer.org writes:
My for function was indeed flip map. Perhaps it's not
in any library, but it's often seen on the #haskell IRC
channel. :)
Hmmm, I had never heard of this but going back through my logs I do
indeed find nornagon, jethr0 and jmcarthur all either stating this
*
sure I did enjoy the discussion here Yitzchak Gale. I have already
submitted several questions ,and you guys were very helpful. However , I am
not sure how I will use Haskell other than my Haskell course that has just
finished.
*
On 28 May 2010 14:52, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
*Pete Chown and Dan Doel. Thank you for your solution. I actually It was not
homework . It was just a a past exam question trying to answer . *
**but your solution is very long , so I don't think he wants answer this
long in the exams. I think this answer agree100 f g = map f xs == map g xs
where
Mujtaba Boori wrote:
I think this answer agree100 f g = map f xs == map g xs where
xs = [1..100] from Richard O'Keefe
is do the job.
agree100 = (==) `on` for [1..100]
Regards,
Yitz
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On May 27, 2010, at 11:50 PM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
Mujtaba Boori wrote:
I think this answer agree100 f g = map f xs == map g xs where
xs = [1..100] from Richard O'Keefe
is do the job.
agree100 = (==) `on` for [1..100]
Search for on and for in the Haskell 98 Report and you
will not find
On 28 May 2010 09:37, Richard O'Keefe o...@cs.otago.ac.nz wrote:
On May 27, 2010, at 11:50 PM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
agree100 = (==) `on` for [1..100]
Search for on and for in the Haskell 98 Report and you
will not find them. If you want to tell someone to use them,
you ought to tell them
On May 28, 2010, at 1:05 PM, Ivan Miljenovic wrote:
On 28 May 2010 09:37, Richard O'Keefe o...@cs.otago.ac.nz wrote:
On May 27, 2010, at 11:50 PM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
agree100 = (==) `on` for [1..100]
Search for on and for in the Haskell 98 Report and you
will not find them. If you
On 28 May 2010 14:52, Richard O'Keefe o...@cs.otago.ac.nz wrote: Yes,
that kind of thing.
Remember, this was a BEGINNER-type question.
If one is giving a *serious* answer, it has to be an answer a
beginner (who has almost certainly never heard of Traversable)
can make sense of, and if it uses
This is an effect with any language that offers a very high degree of
abstraction.
I think this is an example of the Haskell effect (more typically
seen on #haskell), which can be categorised as follows:
1) Someone asks a (usually rather simple) question.
2) People discuss this and provide
On Thursday 27 May 2010 9:05:40 pm Ivan Miljenovic wrote:
On 28 May 2010 09:37, Richard O'Keefe o...@cs.otago.ac.nz wrote:
On May 27, 2010, at 11:50 PM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
agree100 = (==) `on` for [1..100]
Search for on and for in the Haskell 98 Report and you
will not find them. If
On Wednesday 26 May 2010 5:38:57 pm Pete Chown wrote:
test :: (Eq a) = (Int - a) - (Int - a) - Bool
test f1 f2 = unsafePerformIO $ do
goodSoFar - newIORef True
forLoop 1 100 $ \i -
when (f1 i /= f2 i) $ writeIORef goodSoFar False
readIORef goodSoFar
The problem with
12 matches
Mail list logo
