On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 15:50 -0400, David Barton wrote:
OK, I suspect this is a real newbie error, but please have mercy. I have
downloaded and installed cabal (at least it responds to the --help command
from the command line). Yet when I do, say (to give a real example):
cabal configure
Folks,
I'm not sure who to email about this, but hopefully someone on the cafe knows:
On the machine which builds the Hackage packages the 'binary' package
is built against 'bytestring-0.9.1.2', however the package I just
uploaded gets built against 'bytestring-0.9.1.3' which leades to
typecheck
(This is a literate haskell post, save into SMM.lhs and load in ghci!)
Here's one place you might use [()] and []:
guard :: Bool - [()]
guard True = [()]
guard False = []
You can then use guard in monadic list computations to abort the
computation on some branches:
sendmoney :: [[Int]]
Great! Are there any chances of getting support for non-Win32
platforms with Mono?
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Andrew Appleyard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to announce the first release of Salsa, an experimental Haskell
library that allows Haskell programs to access .NET libraries.
Hi Simon,
Thanks for link! I attended JAOO and there were some great talks on
programminng langauges, I really enjoyed Guy Steele's introduction to Fortres
and Eric Meijer's Fundamentalist Functional Programming, as well as Anders
Hejlsberg's talk, and there were also talks on Scala and F#.
Antoine Latter wrote:
Folks,
I'm not sure who to email about this, but hopefully someone on the cafe knows:
On the machine which builds the Hackage packages the 'binary' package
is built against 'bytestring-0.9.1.2', however the package I just
uploaded gets built against 'bytestring-0.9.1.3'
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 9:50 PM, David Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, I suspect this is a real newbie error, but please have mercy. I have
downloaded and installed cabal (at least it responds to the --help command
from the command line). Yet when I do, say (to give a real example):
2008/10/9 Eric Kow [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all,
I am delighted to announce the release of darcs 2.1.0, available at
http://darcs.net/darcs-2.1.0.tar.gz
Yay!
Ubuntu packages at the usual place: https://launchpad.net/~laney/+archive
Note that I inadvertently messed up the version numbering
I'd like to announce the first release of Salsa, an experimental Haskell
library that allows Haskell programs to access .NET libraries.
Here's a taste:
type Hello.hs
import Foreign.Salsa
import Bindings
main = withCLR $ do
_Console # _writeLine (Hello .NET World!)
type
What is the difference between empty list [] and list with one unit
element [()]?
Or, yet:
():[()] --is legal
10:[()] --is not
One list can contain elements of a
single type. Since the type of () is
() (element constructors and types
are allowed to have the same name),
a list of type [()]
Jason Dusek jason.dusek at gmail.com writes:
This simple little package obtains a MAC address on *NIX and Windows.
It is known to work on Linux, OS X and Windows XP.
There is no C fanciness in this package -- it relies on shell
commands. The MAC is cached after the first query,
This could be a game changer.
Great work Andrew!!
-- Don
andrew.appleyard:
I'd like to announce the first release of Salsa, an experimental Haskell
library that allows Haskell programs to access .NET libraries.
Here's a taste:
type Hello.hs
import Foreign.Salsa
import Bindings
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 10:59 -0700, Daryoush Mehrtash wrote:
I was in fact trying to figure out how guard worked in the do.
The interesting (for a beginner) insight is that:
[()] map f = [f]
I don't think any clarity is added by made-up notation. I think you
mean
map f [()] =
On 9 Oct 2008, at 9:33 pm, Andrew Coppin wrote:
I think it's just the teaching of the language that needs work,
not so much the language itself.
As a newer user myself, I'd agree with this statement. I'd like to
see far more mundane tasks solved in tutorials. The number of times
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 19:08 +0100, Iain Barnett wrote:
On 9 Oct 2008, at 9:33 pm, Andrew Coppin wrote:
I think it's just the teaching of the language that needs work,
not so much the language itself.
As a newer user myself, I'd agree with this statement. I'd like to
see far more
I don't think any clarity is added by made-up notation. I think you
mean
In fact I was trying to be correct on this. Is it wrong to show:
[()] f = f
as was doing:
[()] map f = [f]
I want to say map function f over a single element list will yield a list of
single element, the element being
On 10 Oct 2008, at 7:05 pm, Jonathan Cast wrote:
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 19:08 +0100, Iain Barnett wrote:
In Haskell it is.
Parsec makes recursive descent parsers as easy to use in Haskell as
regexps are in Perl. No reason not to expose newcomers to Haskell to
the thing it does best.
jcc
I was in fact trying to figure out how guard worked in the do.The
interesting (for a beginner) insight is that:
[()] map f = [f] --( just as any list with one element would have been
such as [1] map f = [f] ) where as
[] map f = []
so if your guard computes to [()] (or any list of
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 11:14 -0700, Daryoush Mehrtash wrote:
I don't think any clarity is added by made-up notation. I
think you
mean
In fact I was trying to be correct on this.
Great!
Is it wrong to show:
[()] f = f
as was doing:
[()] map f = [f]
Yes.
Greetings,
I'm interested in doing a survey about the use of Haskell in the field
of Artificial Intelligence. I searched in Google, and found in the
HaskellWiki, at www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell_in_industry, two
organizations that use Haskell and do work related to AI. Besides that,
I
This could be a game changer.
Great work Andrew!!
Totally agreed, on both accounts. Really interesting to see.
-- Don
What, no Arch Linux port? :-)
Cheers,
/Niklas
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
Don Stewart wrote:
This could be a game changer.
In what way? As far as I'm aware, .NET never really caught on and has
long since become obsolete. Or do you just mean the type system
machinery that has been developed could be used for other projects?
Great work Andrew!!
Yes
.NET never really caught on and has long since become obsolete.
Oh, if only this was the case. :( You wouldn't believe the things I have to
make .NET run on (but I can't talk about it... yay for NDAs).
/jve
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Andrew Coppin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Don Stewart
Iain Barnett wrote:
On 9 Oct 2008, at 9:33 pm, Andrew Coppin wrote:
I think it's just the teaching of the language that needs work, not
so much the language itself.
As a newer user myself, I'd agree with this statement. I'd like to see
far more mundane tasks solved in tutorials.
I
Andrew Coppin wrote:
Don Stewart wrote:
This could be a game changer.
In what way? As far as I'm aware, .NET never really caught on and has
long since become obsolete.
Wha? Microsoft's programming languages all now depend on and compile to
.NET runtime (the CLR), including C#,
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 15:00 -0500, Tommy M. McGuire wrote:
On 10 Oct 2008, at 7:05 pm, Jonathan Cast wrote:
Parsec makes recursive descent parsers as easy to use in Haskell as
regexps are in Perl. No reason not to expose newcomers to Haskell to
the thing it does best.
Is it wrong to
jason.dusek:
Tommy M. McGuire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it wrong to use Parsec to parse regular expressions for a
really simple regex engine[4]?
I sometimes think it is better, from a maintainability
standpoint, to just use Parsec for all that stuff and forget
about regular
roger peppe wrote:
By the way, where does FRP (which I haven't got my head around yet)
sit with respect
to STM?
Entirely orthogonal.
FRP is not generally thought of as (explicitly) threaded at all. It's
more declarative than that. It's also supposed to be deterministic (up
to the
Tommy M. McGuire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The mathematical doodahs are *very* useful, much more so than
any other language I have used, but it helps to have some kind
of foundation to understand how and why. I am frequently
reminded of a How to Draw page from the Tick[3] comic, which
went
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:05:43 -0700, Jonathan Cast wrote:
No reason not to expose newcomers to Haskell to the thing it does best.
This is precisely why newcomers flounder. Yes, there certainly should be
a Haskell for experienced Java/C++ programmers : All of the advanced
things you can do more
Anton van Straaten wrote:
I've heard people at more than one company say that if they could
access .NET well from Haskell, they wouldn't be as interested in F#.
Mmm, I could see how that would work... ;-)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 22:24 +0100, Iain Barnett wrote:
On 10 Oct 2008, at 9:00 pm, Tommy M. McGuire wrote:
Iain Barnett wrote:
On 9 Oct 2008, at 9:33 pm, Andrew Coppin wrote:
I think it's just the teaching of the language that needs work,
not so much the language itself.
As a newer
Steve Schafer wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:05:43 -0700, Jonathan Cast wrote:
No reason not to expose newcomers to Haskell to the thing it does best.
This is precisely why newcomers flounder. Yes, there certainly should be
a Haskell for experienced Java/C++ programmers : All of the
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 19:27 +0100, Iain Barnett wrote:
On 10 Oct 2008, at 7:05 pm, Jonathan Cast wrote:
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 19:08 +0100, Iain Barnett wrote:
In Haskell it is.
Parsec makes recursive descent parsers as easy to use in Haskell as
regexps are in Perl. No reason not to
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Jonathan Cast
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 17:13 -0400, Steve Schafer wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:05:43 -0700, Jonathan Cast wrote:
No reason not to expose newcomers to Haskell to the thing it does best.
This is precisely why newcomers
[4] http://www.crsr.net/Programming_Languages/SoftwareTools/ch6.html
Hi Tommy,
I had never seen this before. It nicely fills a gap, and I really like
the format and the writing. Bookmarked. Thanks!
-Simon
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Jonathan Cast wrote:
Newcomers flounder because they expect to keep programming the same way
they always have.
_Some_ newcommers flounder because they expect Haskell to be just
another VB / C++ / Java / whatever. (Do we really want to encourage
these people to be learning Haskell in the
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 22:40 +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Iain Barnett wrote:
On 10 Oct 2008, at 9:50 pm, Don Stewart wrote:
Haskell makes
constructing true parsers just as easy,
You're not speaking for me there! :) I really like regex. It's a
domain specific functional language,
Martin DeMello wrote:
http://blog.moertel.com/articles/2006/10/18/a-type-based-solution-to-the-strings-problem
is a brilliant example of a common workaday problem found in other
languages, and solved elegantly in Haskell
Oh, hey, that's pretty nice...
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 22:49 +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Jonathan Cast wrote:
Newcomers flounder because they expect to keep programming the same way
they always have.
_Some_ newcommers flounder because they expect Haskell to be just
another VB / C++ / Java / whatever. (Do we really want
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 22:43 +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Jonathan Cast wrote:
Why would I want to do I/O, when I don't know how to do anything
interesting with the input yet, or how to generate interesting output?
I think the `I/O comes first' attitude is *precisely* the difference
between
On 2008 Oct 10, at 15:48, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Don Stewart wrote:
This could be a game changer.
In what way? As far as I'm aware, .NET never really caught on and
has long since become
News to me; lots of people installing VS.NET on campus...
--
brandon s. allbery
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 5:12 AM, Andrew Appleyard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to announce the first release of Salsa, an experimental Haskell
library that allows Haskell programs to access .NET libraries.
Wow, that's really great. I have a .NET friendly employer, so I'm happy to
see a
All,
I've created a cheat sheet for Haskell. It's a PDF that tries to
summarize Haskell 98's syntax, keywords and other language elements.
It's currently available on hackage[1]. Once downloaded, unpack the
archive and you'll see the PDF. A literate source file is also
included.
If you install
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 10:35:05PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
OTOH, it's easy to criticise what somebody else wrote. Much harder to
write something better yourself... :-/
PS. I'm curios to see what happens when the book gets to the
interesting stuff. The intro seems to promise that
On Oct 10, 2008, at 5:46 PM, Jonathan Cast wrote:
identifier = lexeme $ match [[:lower:]_][[:alphanum:]_]*
(pretending match :: String - Parser String is a regex engine).
vs.
identified = lexeme $ do
c - satisfy isLower | satisfy (=='_')
s - many $ satisfy isAlphaNum | satisfy
Quoth John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
| Uh... yes. Opening and closing files, command-line parsing, etc --
| needed by almost every program. Aside from some very simple
| stdin-to-stdout filters, it is difficult to imagine a program where
| you don't need to open a file!
That's how it seems to
47 matches
Mail list logo
