Hi Yuras,
thanks for the link. That's the sad truth. I don't know the actual
reasons, but suspect there are many. Overtime work, fatigue, greed and
alienation which are ubiquitous it today's society are among them. I
admire people who nevertheless manage to work on open source projects in
Sven Panne wrote:
2013/9/27 Conal Elliott co...@conal.net:
[...] Am I mistaken about the current status? I.e., is there a solution for
Haskell GUI graphics programming that satisfies the properties I'm looking
for (cross-platform, easily buildable, GHCi-friendly, and
OpenGL-compatible)? [...]
Sven Panne wrote:
2013/9/27 Heinrich Apfelmus apfel...@quantentunnel.de:
Actually, I'm reading about WebGL right now, and it appears to me that it
should be very easy to support in Threepenny. [...]
I am not sure if WebGL is enough: WebGL is basically OpenGL ES 2.0,
which is again basically
[Transition in editorship of HCAR in progress!]
Dear all,
We would like to collect contributions for the 25th edition of the
Haskell Communities Activities Report
Thanks for the responses all.
I'm afraid the point about GHC.Generics got lost here. I'll respond and
then rename this as a specific library proposal.
I don't want to fix the world's Eq instances, but I am ok with requiring
that people derive Generic for any data they want to put in an LVar
Hi,
Ryan Newton wrote:
It is very hard for me to
see why people should be able to make their own Generic instances (that
might lie about the structure of the type), in Safe-Haskell.
I guess that lying Generics instances might arise because of software
evolution. Let's say we start with an
The abstract-par class has used multi-parameter type classes with fundeps:
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/abstract-par-0.3.1/docs/Control-Monad-Par-Class.html#g:1
And I'm trying to port it to use type families. But the following
combination seems to be completely unusable for me right now:
Oops, right after I sent I realized the answer ;-). I needed to delete one
character to uncurry the type function. That is:
type Future m
instead of
type Future m a
The fixed version is here:
On 10/2/13 4:55 PM, Omari Norman wrote:
I'm pleased to make the first public announcement of the availability of
Penny, a double-entry command-line accounting system.
Hurrah! Congrats Omari.
Will there be a 1.0 release, or will you be forever chasing that number
like me ?
(replicating what i said on the ghc-devs thread)
one thing i'm confused by, and this wasn't properly addressed in the prior
threads,
is
for a type like
data Annotated t ann = MkAnn t ann
would you consider the following unsafe?
instance Eq t = Eq ( Annotated t ann)
(==) (MkAnn t1 _)
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Tillmann Rendel
ren...@informatik.uni-marburg.de wrote:
Hi,
Ryan Newton wrote:
It is very hard for me to
see why people should be able to make their own Generic instances (that
might lie about the structure of the type), in Safe-Haskell.
I guess that
I saw the the video on g+, it's especially nice with live
instruments. I noticed the code had a fair amount of stuff dealing
with limitations of the auto-bass, I assume you had to be careful not
to gum up its works. Is there a robotic drumset back there somewhere
too?
Also change ringing is new
Tillmann,
Thanks, that is in interesting use case for handwritten Generics.
I'm not fully dissuaded though, simply because:
(1) it can't be too common! Especially when you intersect the people who
have done or will do this with the people who care about SafeHaskell.
(Again, if they don't,
13 matches
Mail list logo
