On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Then, a *rational* approximation gives you the same precision with
less coeffs. Nowadays the division is not sooo much more expensive
than the multiplication, so the efficiency doesn't suffer much.
It might not
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrapping_%28compilers%29 .
But I can't say what was the particular method used by GHC.
Cya,
--
Felipe.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Somebody just asked me
...if GHC is written in Haskell, how the heck did they compile GHC in
the first place?
... and what happens, if they add a new feature, use it in the compiler
itself, and then it turns out, that the implementation of the new
G'day all.
Quoting Felipe Lessa [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
But I can't say what was the particular method used by GHC.
I don't either, but here's a suggested plan of attack:
1. Write a parser for a suitable subset of Haskell, in a closely
related language (e.g. Miranda).
2. Write a front-end that
Hello Andrew,
Sunday, November 11, 2007, 12:12:50 PM, you wrote:
...if GHC is written in Haskell, how the heck did they compile GHC in
the first place?
by any other haskell compiler/interpreter
--
Best regards,
Bulatmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Chris,
You wrote:
If you wanted to write a Haskell application that included a WYSIWYG
HTML editor, how would you do it?
I would use fckeditor.
Why do you need to write an HTML editor from scratch
in Haskell? That is a very, very big wheel to re-invent.
Regards,
Yitz
Hello!
I'm very glad to announce the release of Xmobar-0.8.
You can grab the source code from Hackage:
http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/xmobar-0.8
Xmobar is a minimalistic, text based, status bar. It was specifically
designed to work with the XMonad Window Manager.
Yitzchak Gale wrote:
I would use fckeditor.
Sorry to be unclear. I'm looking for a way to integrate an HTML editor
into a GUI application, not a web application. Unless I missed
something, fckeditor is a JavaScript-based component that is designed to
be included in a web page.
Why do
Hi
...if GHC is written in Haskell, how the heck did they compile GHC in
the first place?
GHC was not the first Haskell compiler, hbc was the main compiler at
some point, so I suspect they used hbc. There was also lazy ML which I
suspect was used to bootstrap hbc - but I'm not sure of the
hi
I was testing my code when I came across a strange predicament. The input is a
list of ints and a Results type which is of type
[(int,...),(Int..)..]. I am comparing each int from the list to the
first element in each member of results. But it works for 1-9 but not for 10
On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 23:44 -0700, Chris Smith wrote:
If you wanted to write a Haskell application that included a WYSIWYG
HTML editor, how would you do it?
More details:
- I'll probably be using Gtk2Hs for the app, though that could change
with a (very) good reason.
I would look into
GHC can be compiled with GHC 5.0 (or something around there). If they
add a new feature, they don't use it in GHC for years and years.
*Can* be compiled with GHC 5.0, or *is* compiled?
http://haskell.org/ghc/docs/6.8.1/html/users_guide/release-6-8-1.html says
that the pointer tagging in 6.8.1
On Nov 11, 2007 6:37 AM, Ryan Bloor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi
I was testing my code when I came across a strange predicament. The input
is a list of ints and a Results type which is of type
[(int,...),(Int..)..]. I am comparing each int from the list to
the first element in
Hi
GHC can be compiled with GHC 5.0 (or something around there). If they
add a new feature, they don't use it in GHC for years and years.
*Can* be compiled with GHC 5.0, or *is* compiled?
Can. If a feature goes horribly wrong, or a build is entirely broken
in some subtle but fundamental
On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 07:43 -0500, Brent Yorgey wrote:
GHC can be compiled with GHC 5.0 (or something around there).
If they add a new feature, they don't use it in GHC for years
and years.
*Can* be compiled with GHC 5.0, or *is* compiled?
Can.
The version
Hi Cale,
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 07:52:18PM -0500, Cale Gibbard wrote:
Recently I noticed that all of my bookmarks to the hierarchical
libraries documentation broke, and I'm not entirely happy with the
solution of just correcting all the links to point at the new URLs
since the URLs all
I have X11 1.2.2 installed and wanted to upgrade to 1.3 (to satisfy the
dependencies of another package), but Setup configure tells me I don't
have the headers installed. I do, and when I configure 1.2.2 they're
detected. Is this due to the newer version of Cabal? I have ghc 6.6, Cabal
1.1.6.
Andrew Coppin wrote:
...if GHC is written in Haskell, how the heck did they compile GHC in
the first place?
The paper A History of Haskell: Being Lazy With Class by Paul Hudak,
John Hughes, Simon Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler is a good read.
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 11:44:54PM -0700, Chris Smith wrote:
If you wanted to write a Haskell application that included a WYSIWYG
HTML editor, how would you do it?
use google docs, yahoo zimbra, or get one of the html editing widgets
from a popular dhtml toolkit and roll your own. in any case,
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 11:07:29AM +, Neil Mitchell wrote:
Hi
...if GHC is written in Haskell, how the heck did they compile GHC in
the first place?
GHC was not the first Haskell compiler, hbc was the main compiler at
some point, so I suspect they used hbc. There was also lazy ML
This isn't a question specific to ghc. In general, the process of
bootstrapping compilers and porting them to new platforms can be
described by T-diagrams. When I did a web search on T-diagrams the
first hit I found,
Dan Piponi wrote:
This isn't a question specific to ghc.
Most certainly not. ;-) (Well, except that I asked where did GHC come
from, which is pretty GHC-specific.)
However, it seems the general point of confusion is that writing (say) a
minimally-working C compiler intuitively seems quite
Neil Mitchell wrote:
Hi
bear no resemblence to any machine-level constructs, and it seems
unthinkable that you could possibly write such a compiler in anything
but Haskell itself.
Hugs is written in C.
Really? :-.
Well anyway, I didn't say it can't be done - I said it *looks*
Hi
bear no resemblence to any machine-level constructs, and it seems
unthinkable that you could possibly write such a compiler in anything
but Haskell itself.
Hugs is written in C.
Really? :-.
Really :-)
(Seriously, how big is Hugs? It must be quite large...)
56111 lines, with
On Nov 11, 2007 9:26 AM, Jim Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have X11 1.2.2 installed and wanted to upgrade to 1.3 (to satisfy the
dependencies of another package), but Setup configure tells me I don't
have the headers installed. I do, and when I configure 1.2.2 they're
detected. Is this
It's interesting that the article completely fails to mention hbc
which I know they used during the GHC bootstrap. Oh well. :)
On Nov 11, 2007 2:41 PM, Richard Kelsall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Coppin wrote:
...if GHC is written in Haskell, how the heck did they compile GHC in
the
On Nov 11, 2007, at 12:16 , Andrew Coppin wrote:
However, it seems the general point of confusion is that writing
(say) a minimally-working C compiler intuitively seems quite easy
(after all, C is an extremely low-level language), whereas the
constructs in Haskell bear no resemblence to
Expressiveness certainly makes it easier, but nothing (other than
sanity...) stops you from writing a Haskell compiler in, say, COBOL.
*I* would stop you. Friends don't let friends write in COBOL.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
On Nov 11, 2007 7:00 PM, Brent Yorgey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Expressiveness certainly makes it easier, but nothing (other than
sanity...) stops you from writing a Haskell compiler in, say, COBOL.
*I* would stop you. Friends don't let friends write in COBOL.
+1 QOTW =)
--
Felipe.
Hi all,
Does anyone know if c2hs should be working on Windows? I'm trying to
build it under ghc 6.8.0, but this happens:
C:\Users\Alex\Documents\Plugins\c2hs\c2hs-0.15.0runghc Setup.hs configure
Configuring c2hs-0.15.0...
Setup.hs: Error: Non-empty library, but empty exposed modules list.
Brent Yorgey wrote:
Expressiveness certainly makes it easier, but nothing (other than
sanity...) stops you from writing a Haskell compiler in, say, COBOL.
*I* would stop you. Friends don't let friends write in COBOL.
That's the funniest thing I've read today. You literally just
Andrew Coppin writes:
Brent Yorgey wrote:
Expressiveness certainly makes it easier, but nothing (other than
sanity...) stops you from writing a Haskell compiler in, say, COBOL.
*I* would stop you. Friends don't let friends write in COBOL.
That's the funniest thing I've read
On Nov 11, 2007, at 17:26 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Coppin writes:
Brent Yorgey wrote:
Expressiveness certainly makes it easier, but nothing (other
than
sanity...) stops you from writing a Haskell compiler in, say,
COBOL. *I* would stop you. Friends don't let friends
I would be the last who wanted to spoil such a good joke.
But... tell me please, ANYONE, who takes part in this inspiring exchange:
How many COBOL programs have you written in your life?
How many programs in Cobol have you actually SEEN?
My current project at work has a bunch of legacy
Hello,
What is the current status of the Memo module, for memoizing functions?
It seems to have disappeared from the standard Hugs/GHC distributions;
are we supposed to just find the old code on Google which uses
System.Mem.Weak?
A related question is whether anyone has built a library for
G'day all.
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
But... tell me please, ANYONE, who takes part in this inspiring
exchange: How many COBOL programs have you written in your life?
As you well know, only one COBOL program has ever been written. The
rest are just modifications of it.
Actually, a more
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
G'day all.
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
But... tell me please, ANYONE, who takes part in this inspiring
exchange: How many COBOL programs have you written in your life?
As you well know, only one COBOL program has ever been written. The
rest
On 12/11/2007, at 4:32 AM, Neil Mitchell wrote:
Hi
bear no resemblence to any machine-level constructs, and it seems
unthinkable that you could possibly write such a compiler in
anything
but Haskell itself.
Hugs is written in C.
Really? :-.
Really :-)
(Seriously, how big is
On 12/11/2007, at 9:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But... tell me please, ANYONE, who takes part in this inspiring
exchange:
How many COBOL programs have you written in your life?
How many programs in Cobol have you actually SEEN?
I saw a lot of COBOL when I worked for a stock broking
---
Haskell Weekly News
http://sequence.complete.org/hwn/2007
Issue 67 - November 11, 2007
---
Welcome to issue 67 of HWN, a newsletter covering
G'day all.
I asked:
Actually, a more interesting problem is what you'd replace COBOL with,
and how you'd go about it. Wouldn't it be nice if there was a modern
language that you could write or rewrite new parts of your COBOL
application in, and it all worked seamlessly with what you already
Henning Thielemann:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
... tell me please: How many COBOL programs have you written in
your life?
As you well know, only one COBOL program has ever been written. The
rest are just modifications of it.
Actually, a more interesting
apfelmus showed the implementation of the state monad as free term
algebra, using GADT. Here's an implementation that does not use GADT
http://okmij.org/ftp/Haskell/types.html#state-algebra
All the smarts are in the observation function. This style is _very_
well explained by Ralf Hinze
Bernie Pope wrote:
On 12/11/2007, at 4:32 AM, Neil Mitchell wrote:
Hi
bear no resemblence to any machine-level constructs, and it seems
unthinkable that you could possibly write such a compiler in anything
but Haskell itself.
Hugs is written in C.
Really? :-.
Really :-)
I have a copy of COBOL for Dummies which I bought as a joke and have never
dared read.
Mike
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Coppin writes:
Brent Yorgey wrote:
Expressiveness certainly makes it easier, but nothing (other than
sanity...) stops you from writing a Haskell compiler in,
Hello,
I have code which seems to contain a memory leak, but I'm not sure
where it is or what's causing it. Any help would be greatly
appreciated:
The code is:
data Ratings = Ratings { movieCount :: Int
, movieLookup :: IOUArray Int Word32
,
On 12/11/2007, at 4:08 PM, Michael Vanier wrote:
Bernie Pope wrote:
If I remember correctly, the early versions of the Clean compiler
were written in C. Then at some stage they re-wrote it in Clean.
You could say they cleaned it up.
It was a dirty job, but now it is self cleaning.
J. Garrett Morris wrote:
Hello,
I have code which seems to contain a memory leak, but I'm not sure
where it is or what's causing it. Any help would be greatly
appreciated:
I see no memory leak in your code, it just breaks the garbage
collector's heuristics by allocating an awful lot of
48 matches
Mail list logo
