Sorry for the wrong information. I made a mistake when did the test.
After more testing, I think it is a bug of ghc 7.4.1. Until now, I
cannot find a way to make ghc 7.4.1 compiled binary work.
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Magicloud Magiclouds
magicloud.magiclo...@gmail.com wrote:
Alright,
Sorry for the wrong information. I made a mistake when did the test.
After more testing, I think it is a bug of ghc 7.4.1. Until now, I cannot
find a way to make ghc 7.4.1 compiled binary work.
It sounds like this should be looked at further. Somebody should verify try to
repeat what you
observe $ flip runStateT 10 $ (put 0 mzero) | modify (+3)
((),13)
If the only thing you need is backtracking, using LogicT might be a little
overkill, using Maybe in the bottom of you monad stack suits just fine:
case flip runStateT 10 $ (put 0 mzero) | modify (+3) of
Just x -
Sorry for the wrong information. I made a mistake when did the test.
After more testing, I think it is a bug of ghc 7.4.1. Until now, I cannot
find a way to make ghc 7.4.1 compiled binary work.
I have set up this test on 7.4.1 and I cannot recreate the problem -- compiling
and running an
* Yves Parès yves.pa...@gmail.com [2012-05-28 11:28:22+0200]
observe $ flip runStateT 10 $ (put 0 mzero) | modify (+3)
((),13)
If the only thing you need is backtracking, using LogicT might be a little
overkill, using Maybe in the bottom of you monad stack suits just fine:
case flip
Actually, I think the backtracking property here stems more from the
MonadPlus StateT instance than from the properties of Maybe.
(mplus a b runs a and b by passing explicitely the same state to them).
2012/5/28 Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info
* Yves Parès yves.pa...@gmail.com [2012-05-28
(English message follows after the break.)
Olá!
Estamos procurando um estagiário para trabalhar conosco em São Paulo
capital. Nós somos uma startup apaixonada por Haskell com uma boa
participação na comunidade e grandes projetos e desafios!
Se você está interessado, basta me mandar um e-mail
Gábor Lehel illissius at gmail.com writes:
If you're referring to the NewAxioms work Simon linked to ... [snip]
... It seems vaguely similar to a paper on instance chains[2]
I saw once.
Thanks Gábor for the reference, but I don't think they're very comparable.
The instance chains is in
Interesting. I have this code tested in Debian unstable/stable, CentOS
6.1, all 64 bit, with two different version of libldap2.
At first, Debian-s were installed with 7.4.1, CentOS with 7.2.2. Only
in CentOS the code connected after compiled.
Then I removed 7.4.1 from Debian stable and installed
