One way to think about Reactive's notion of Future is as a single
element of an event stream--something that might happen (yielding a
value) some time in the future.
'mempty' on futures is a future that never happens, and 'mappend' says
to pick the first of two futures to happen.
m = k waits for
Hi,
This is mostly a question for Roman : how do you use your vector library with
multi-dimensional arrays ? I mean, the array library from the standard
libraries does something more intelligent than the C-like solution with
indirections.
For instance, it allows you to program a single
On 14 February 2011 10:19, Pierre-Etienne Meunier
pierreetienne.meun...@gmail.com wrote:
For instance, it allows you to program a single function that works for any
dimensionality of the array.
I don't know how vector handles it, but you may be interested to look
at the repa library
On Sat, 12 Feb 2011 19:38:31 +0530
C K Kashyap ckkash...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, how can one go about explaining to an imperative programmer
with no FP exposure - what aspect of Haskell makes it easy to
refactor?
Like other people have said, the static type system is a major factor.
It's
Hi.
How could I convince lhs2tex to add in poly mode line numbers before
each code line in code block?
A long time ago, I've written some experimental code that achieves
line numbering in lhs2tex. I've committed the files to the github
repository, so you can have a look at the .fmt file and
Pierre-Etienne Meunier wrote:
This is mostly a question for Roman : how do you use your vector library
with multi-dimensional arrays ? I mean, the array library from the
standard libraries does something more intelligent than the C-like
solution with indirections.
Vector doesn't include any
Hi Evan,
The reason it's not in Data.List is because there are a bazillion
different splits one might want (when I was pondering the issue
before Brent released it, I had collected something like 8
different proposed splits), so no agreement could ever be reached.
It is curious though
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:33:16PM -0800, Donn Cave wrote:
It is curious though that the Python community managed to agree on a
single implementation and include that in the standard library
To me, it's more like 2 implementations, overloaded on the same
function name.
Python 2.6.2
Pedro Vasconcelos wrote:
This is because all input and output data flow is type checked in a
function application, whereas imperative side effects might escape
checking.
For example, the type signature for a variable swapping procedure in C:
void swap(int *a, int *b)
This will still
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:54:55 +0100
Tillmann Rendel ren...@informatik.uni-marburg.de wrote:
This benefit of explicit input and output values can interact nicely
with parametric polymorphism:
swap :: (a, b) - (b, a)
This more general type signature makes sure we are not just returning
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Pedro Vasconcelos p...@dcc.fc.up.pt wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2011 19:38:31 +0530
C K Kashyap ckkash...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, how can one go about explaining to an imperative programmer
with no FP exposure - what aspect of Haskell makes it easy to
refactor?
Hi Andre, good to hear from you.
On Feb 13, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Andre Wilson Brotto Furtado wrote:
This is great, thanks Simon. I'm currently not involved in any
haskell projects anymore, but please do keep the ball rolling for
FunGEn.
I'm currenty exploring how domain-specific development
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 15:07:01 +0100
Gábor Lehel illiss...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not completely sure, but I suspect another part of it (or maybe
I'm just rephrasing what you said?) has to do with the fact that in
Haskell, basically everything is an expression.
Yes, the fact that control
This is my last part from a project and I need some help with the following
function:
If a clause in a propositional formula contains only one literal, then that
literal must be true (so that the
particular clause can be satisfied). When this happens, we remove the unit
clauses (the ones that
Quoth Peter Simons sim...@cryp.to,
...
having a dictator is not a necessary prerequisite for the ability to
make decisions. It's quite possible to decide controversial matters
without a dictator -- say, by letting people vote.
The problem might be slightly miscast here, as an inability to
Thomas Davie schrieb:
A while ago I remember someone showing me some tool, I *think* ghci that
allowed you to pass it a function of type String - String as an input, and
have it simply run that function on stdin (presumably using interact) to
achieve useful things like this...
$ cat
Hi Magnus,
Finally, you can switch to the pure annotations. I will document them
shortly and give an example in System.Console.CmdArgs.Implicit, but
for now the details can be found at
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/cmdargs/0.6.7/doc/html/System-Console-CmdArgs-Annotate.html
On 10 February 2011 22:03, Dominique Devriese
dominique.devri...@cs.kuleuven.be wrote:
Also, is there any news yet on a procedure for community members with
accounts on projects.haskell.org to get access to them again? My ssh
publickey login is no longer being accepted. I had an account mainly
On 11-02-12 09:40 PM, Brandon S Allbery KF8NH wrote:
Only up to a point. While most of the responses so far focus on the
question from one direction, the other is epitomized by a Knuth quote:
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.
Knuth's definition of
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 7:43 AM, PatrickM patrickm7...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
This is my last part from a project and I need some help with the
following
function:
If a clause in a propositional formula contains only one literal, then
that
literal must be true (so that the
particular clause
Sorely, Haskell can't prove logic with it. No predicates on values, guarantee
that proof is not _|_. Haskell makes bug free software affordable, that's true.
But it's not a proof assistant.
pavel
On 14.02.2011, at 22:57, Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:
On 11-02-12 09:40 PM, Brandon S Allbery KF8NH
On 11-02-14 03:03 PM, Pavel Perikov wrote:
Sorely, Haskell can't prove logic with it. No predicates on values, guarantee
that proof is not _|_. Haskell makes bug free software affordable, that's true.
But it's not a proof assistant.
Who claimed that Haskell is a proof assistant?
Who claimed that Haskell is a proof assistant?
no one sanely will :) Haskell is a beautiful and practical (!) programming
language with great infrastructure and community. Sadly, proving inside
haskell is hard :) And it doesn't bring me coffee in the morning too (well, it
mostly does)
Is this a known bug? (GHC 6.10.x)
It's known to happen when optimising shares what shouldn't be shared. Try
compiling with -O2 -fno-cse (if that doesn't help, it doesn't necessarily
mean it's not unwanted sharing, though).
And, please, let us see some code to identify the problem.
I tried -O2
Hi all,
I am trying to get a GHC rewrite rule that specialises a function
according to the type of the argument of the function. Does anybody know
whether it is possible to do that not with a concrete type but rather a
type class?
Consider the following example:
class A a where
toInt
On 14.02.2011, at 03:03 PM, Pavel Perikov [peri...@gmail.com] wrote:
Sorely, Haskell can't prove logic with it. No predicates on values, guarantee
that proof is not _|_. Haskell makes bug free software affordable, that's true.
But it's not a proof assistant.
Being equivalent to a class of
On 14 February 2011 21:43, Patrick Bahr pa...@arcor.de wrote:
Am I doing something wrong or is it not possible for GHC to dispatch a rule
according to type class constraints?
As you have discovered this is not possible. You can write the rule
for as many *particular* types as you like, but you
On 14 February 2011 21:00, Andrew Coppin andrewcop...@btinternet.com wrote:
Is this a known bug? (GHC 6.10.x)
It's known to happen when optimising shares what shouldn't be shared. Try
compiling with -O2 -fno-cse (if that doesn't help, it doesn't necessarily
mean it's not unwanted sharing,
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 12:48 AM, Max Bolingbroke
batterseapo...@hotmail.com wrote:
On 14 February 2011 21:43, Patrick Bahr pa...@arcor.de wrote:
Am I doing something wrong or is it not possible for GHC to dispatch a rule
according to type class constraints?
As you have discovered this is not
Hi!
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Andres Loeh
andres.l...@googlemail.com wrote:
A long time ago, I've written some experimental code that achieves
line numbering in lhs2tex. I've committed the files to the github
repository, so you can have a look at the .fmt file and the demo
document in
Hi,
I have uploaded a small package, vector-buffer, to hackage. It provides a
buffer that can be turned into a Data.Vector.Storable. The mapM* functions
map from the oldest element, not the first. Similarly for the derived
Vector.
Feature requests etc. welcome.
Vivian
On 2/11/11 1:25 PM, Luke Palmer wrote:
I would like to see a language
that allowed optional verification, but that is a hard balance to make
because of the interaction of non-termination and the evaluation that
needs to happen when verifying a proof.
I believe that ATS (short for Advanced Type
This interface is an outlaw.
main = do
buf - newBuffer 10 :: IO (Buffer Int)
pushNextElement buf 1
let v1 = V.toList (toVector buf)
v2 = V.toList (toVector buf)
print v1
pushNextElement buf 2
print v2
Despite v1 and v2 being defined to equal the exact same thing,
Hi Luke,
Apologies, I think I got bitten by unsafePerformIO.
The reason it wasn't in the IO monad is that the Vector created from the
Buffer is supposed to be immutable.
I've changed the API so that:
main = do
buf - newBuffer 10 :: IO (Buffer Int)
pushNextElement buf 1
v1 - toVector
Hi list,
Could someone explain why the error pointed out by Luke occurred?
From: Luke Palmer lrpal...@gmail.com
I think this would be a very good question for the list. Don't worry,
they're nice helpful folks.
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Alexander McPhail
35 matches
Mail list logo
