| Well, it seems a shame that we don't have postfix operators already.
| I guess that means I am arguing we should introduce a unary postfix
| operator, and not even have sugar for factorial, as it conflicts with
| array access.
|
| We *almost* do:
| Hugs.Base> let (!) 0 = 1; (!) x = x*((!) (x-1))
Andrea Rossato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, I'm not able to create an object file (dynamically) linked to
> HaXml. This is the reason why hxml doesn't work with ghc (and ghci)
> but works perfectly with hugs.
>
> Now, I don't know whether I should contact the HaXml author or submit
> a bug r
Andrea Rossato wrote:
> It seems related to dynamic linking: I created a separated module
> (Xml.hs) that imports Text.XML.HaXml and parses a xml string. I then
> created a file (xml.hs) that imports Xml and prints "name", defined in
> Xml.hs. The expected output should be "elementTest".
Whatever
Il Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 11:30:41AM +0200, Udo Stenzel ebbe a scrivere:
> Whatever it is, I cannot reproduce any of your problems. I installed
> HaXml-1.13.2 from source using Cabal, and both "ghc -c Xml.hs" and "ghc
> --make xml.hs" work as expected, even without the -package switch. This
> is GH
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 02:29 schrieben Sie:
> Hello,
>
> Try Don Stewart's ByteString library
> (http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/fps.html). It is much faster than
> the standard Haskell IO and now has lazy.
>
> -Jeff
Yay, that's really an improvement!
Depending on the size of the file/g
On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Brian Hulley wrote:
> > > negate (expNat 4 2)
> > >
> > > because this would free the ^ symbol for some more widely
> > > applicable use, and would also make the particular choice of
> > > exponentiation operator more explicit
> >
> > Agreed, though I'd want expt to be p
On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Ross Paterson wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 12:57:56AM -0400, Cale Gibbard wrote:
> > Num itself needs to be split, but we can't do it sanely without
> > something like class aliases.
>
> I think that a finer grain numeric hierarchy, while retaining Num, etc,
> is feasible
On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Jón Fairbairn wrote:
> Aaron Denney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On 2006-09-08, Jón Fairbairn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Why shouldn't Naturals be more primitive than Integers?
> >
> > Certainly they're more primitive. Too primitive to have reasonable
> > algebr
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006, Aaron Denney wrote:
> >> Of course, there's always a typeclass, where we could add all sorts of
> >> other encodings of the Peano axioms, such as binary trees,, but I don't
> >> see that that buys us much if we don't also get access to operations
> >> beyond them, such as (an
On 9/11/06, Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Expr Bool = Eq (Expr t) (Expr t) | forall t . Eq t
Still confusing, but less so.
The problem is that it's really backwards. The symbol being defined is "Eq".
Eq (Expr t) (Expr t) | Eq t = Expr Bool
but that doesn't fit well, does i
On 2006-09-11, Henning Thielemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Brian Hulley wrote:
>
>> > > negate (expNat 4 2)
>> > >
>> > > because this would free the ^ symbol for some more widely
>> > > applicable use, and would also make the particular choice of
>> > > exponentiatio
Hello Daniel,
Monday, September 11, 2006, 6:05:38 PM, you wrote:
> The problem spec states that the input file contains about 500 test cases,
> each given by between 1 and 100,000 lines, each line containing a single word
> of between 2 and 1000 letters.
> So the file should be about 12.5G on ave
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 04:26:30PM +0200, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Ross Paterson wrote:
> > I think that a finer grain numeric hierarchy, while retaining Num, etc,
> > is feasible without changing the language: unlike the case of monads,
> > the people who will be defining in
Hello Michael,
you are correct. Only
> * (a `seq` return a) = evaluate a *right now*, then produce an IO action
> which, when executed, returns the result of evaluating a. Thus, if
> a is undefined, throws an exception right now.
is a bit misleading as there is no evaluation "right now". It's
Taral wrote:
On 9/11/06, Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Expr Bool = Eq (Expr t) (Expr t) | forall t . Eq t
Still confusing, but less so.
The problem is that it's really backwards. The symbol being defined
is "Eq".
Eq (Expr t) (Expr t) | Eq t = Expr Bool
but that doesn't fit
On 2006-09-10, Neil Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> I think in practice this wouldn't really be an issue. When you're
>> using natural numbers, you tend to be in a situation where you're
>> either numbering things statically, and not doing any calculations
>> with them, or you're usi
On 2006-09-11, Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>| Well, it seems a shame that we don't have postfix operators already.
>
> Actually, the up-coming GHC 6.6 does allow this.
Awesome.
--
Aaron Denney
-><-
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haske
On 9/11/06, Daniel Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem spec states that the input file contains about 500 test cases,
each given by between 1 and 100,000 lines, each line containing a single word
of between 2 and 1000 letters.
So the file should be about 12.5G on average.
I don't th
On 2006-09-11, Henning Thielemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Sep 2006, Aaron Denney wrote:
>
>> >> Of course, there's always a typeclass, where we could add all sorts of
>> >> other encodings of the Peano axioms, such as binary trees,, but I don't
>> >> see that that buys us much if
On 2006-09-11, Henning Thielemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Ross Paterson wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 12:57:56AM -0400, Cale Gibbard wrote:
>> > Num itself needs to be split, but we can't do it sanely without
>> > something like class aliases.
>>
>> I think that a
Taral wrote:
On 9/11/06, Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Expr Bool = Eq (Expr t) (Expr t) | forall t . Eq t
Still confusing, but less so.
The problem is that it's really backwards. The symbol being defined
is "Eq".
Eq (Expr t) (Expr t) | Eq t = Expr Bool
but that doesn't fit
On 9/11/06, Brian Hulley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
data
Expr t = If (Expr Bool) (Expr t) (Expr t)
Expr Bool = Eq (Expr t) (Expr t) | Eq t
Expr Int = Lit Int
Meh. I'm still not big on it, since in a normal function, the guard is
based on a
Does anyone know if there is a way around the 20 charachter identifier
limitation when heap profiling? I have a number of identifiers that
indistinguishably break that limit.
-mdg
--
Our problems are mostly behind us, now all we have to do is fight the solutions.
___
bitshifter:
> Does anyone know if there is a way around the 20 charachter identifier
> limitation when heap profiling? I have a number of identifiers that
> indistinguishably break that limit.
>
Add custom {-# SCC "mybetteridentifier" #-} pragmas next to the places
with overly long names?
-- Do
24 matches
Mail list logo
