On 24 August 2011 15:54, Sebastian Fischer fisc...@nii.ac.jp wrote:
I _think_ this may cause problems with some data types (e.g.
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/numbers/2009.8.9/doc/html/Data-Number-Natural.html
) that require the extra laziness (that is, you can do things like ` 3
I had simplified the type to make the plumbing simpler. My intention
was to include an initial value to use the function as a sequence
transformer / generator:
data Kl i o = forall s. Kl s (i - s - (s, o))
That change makes a world of difference! For example, the above type
(Kl i) is
Ehm... what? How can you do such a replacement without losing, for example,
functions like this:
f (KI s h) i = snd $ h i $ fst $ h i s
Отправлено с iPad
24.08.2011, в 11:43, o...@okmij.org написал(а):
I had simplified the type to make the plumbing simpler. My intention
was to include
Hello Thomas,
Finally, I have installed the version 0.3.
Thank you for your help
Loïc
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Thomas DuBuisson
thomas.dubuis...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI: It's usually good to CC the package maintainer when a build fails
for non-trivial reasons.
At first glance it
I have some script:
$ runhaskell readfile.hs
fromList [(Merchant {nick = 01010, location = prontera, x = 184, y
= 94},Shop {buy = ShopBuy {titleB = AB Green Salad=5k, itemsB =
fromList [(Item {itemId = 12065, price = 5000, refine = , card1 = 0,
card2 = 0, card3 = 0, card4 = 0},(100,97))]}, sell =
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 04:35:42PM +0400, dokondr wrote:
Hi,
What is the Haskell way to compose functions in run-time?
Depending on configuration parameters I need to be able to compose function
in several ways without recompilation.
When program starts it reads configuration parameters from
If your functions have the same type, then you can easily collect them
in a data structure, say list, and fold that.
For example:
function :: String - (String - String)
function f1 = f1
function f2 = f2
function f3 = f3
runAUserSpecifiedComposition :: String - F
runAUserSpecifiedComposition =
On Wednesday 24 August 2011, 14:45:19, Комар Максим wrote:
I have some script:
$ runhaskell readfile.hs
fromList [(Merchant {nick = 01010, location = prontera, x = 184, y
= 94},Shop {buy = ShopBuy {titleB = AB Green Salad=5k, itemsB =
fromList [(Item {itemId = 12065, price = 5000, refine = ,
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Iustin Pop ius...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 04:35:42PM +0400, dokondr wrote:
Hi,
What is the Haskell way to compose functions in run-time?
Depending on configuration parameters I need to be able to compose
function
in several ways without
The reason may be that you are not printing the result in your program.
runhaskell script prints the result of the main computation by default.
The compiled programs don't do that.
You'll have to call print in your program to achieve the same.
On 24 August 2011 13:45, Комар Максим m...@mtw.ru
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 04:57:19PM +0400, dokondr wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Iustin Pop ius...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 04:35:42PM +0400, dokondr wrote:
Hi,
What is the Haskell way to compose functions in run-time?
Depending on configuration parameters I
Ezra Cooper e...@ezrakilty.net wrote:
I believe this to be a general trait of things described as
calculi--that they have some form of name-binders, but I have never
seen that observation written down.
Combinator calculi are a counter-example.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Arseniy Alekseyev
arseniy.alekse...@gmail.com wrote:
If your functions have the same type, then you can easily collect them
in a data structure, say list, and fold that.
For example:
function :: String - (String - String)
function f1 = f1
function f2 = f2
On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 14:01 +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
Ezra Cooper e...@ezrakilty.net wrote:
I believe this to be a general trait of things described as
calculi--that they have some form of name-binders, but I have never
seen that observation written down.
Combinator calculi are a
One more observation... I tried a third variation in which the test program
still uses a single shared IOArray but each thread writes to different
indices in the array. In this case I get good scaling with performance
similar to the use of IOUArray. In detail, I made the following two changes
to
dokondr doko...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a nice one, looks already like tiny DSL )
I think I've got the main idea - enumerate in my program all function
compositions in some data structure for Haskell to compile, and the
associate these with parameter values in external file.
In Haskell you
I should have double-checked my work before I sent the last message; I
accidentally benchmarked the wrong program. It turns out that the
modifications I last described do not improve the scaling of the program to
more cores when used with IOArray. And there was a bug: the line startIx
= numixs *
Hi all,
Max asked earlier[1] how to create a new instance of a class in
Persistent using a monad transformer. Without getting into the
specific details of persistent, I wanted to pose a question based on a
much more general question: how can we lift the inner monad of an
enumerator? We can easily
On 08/24/2011 09:02 AM, Michael Snoyman wrote:
Hi all,
Max asked earlier[1] how to create a new instance of a class in
Persistent using a monad transformer. Without getting into the
specific details of persistent, I wanted to pose a question based on a
much more general question: how can we
It's always been my understanding that calculi were systems that defined
particular symbols and the legal methods of their manipulation in the context
of a particular calculus. The point, generally (har har), seems to be
abstraction. The lambda calculus describes computation without actually
Hi, all
I thought the right type for ContT should be
newtype ContT m a = ContT {runContT :: forall r. (a- m r) - m r}
and
other control operators
shift :: Monad m = (forall r . (a- ContT m r) - ContT m r) - ContT m a
reset :: Monad m = ContT m a - ContT m a
callCC :: ((a- (forall r . ContT m r)) -
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 9:19 AM, bob zhang bobzhang1...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, all
I thought the right type for ContT should be
newtype ContT m a = ContT {runContT :: forall r. (a- m r) - m r}
and
other control operators
shift :: Monad m = (forall r . (a- ContT m r) - ContT m r) - ContT m a
bob zhang bobzhang1...@gmail.com wrote:
I thought the right type for ContT should be
newtype ContT m a = ContT {runContT :: forall r. (a- m r) - m r}
No, that will effectively make it impossible to make use of CPS effects,
hence turning your ContT into an IdentityT-like monad transformer,
The type signature
liftEnum :: (Monad m, MonadTrans t) = Enumerator a m b -
Enumerator a (t m) b
expands to:
liftEnum :: (Monad m, MonadTrans t) = (Step a m b - Iteratee a m
b) - Step a (t m) b - Iteratee a (t m) b
So you could implement it iff you can define:
lower :: (Monad m,
Hi Jason, thanks for your reply.
I was curious that we could bring really continuations into haskell, the
traditional callCC brings a lot of unnecessary
type restrictions
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Jason Dagit dag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 9:19 AM, bob zhang
Actually, I'm looking for a slightly different type signature. Look at
how I've implemented the special case of ErrorT:
liftEnum :: Enumerator In IO (Either OcrError Out)
- Enumerator In (ErrorT OcrError IO) Out
There's a slightly different value for b, which is what keeps track
of the
Ok, I know, I want something strange. But consider situation, when one
is starting a project and finds, that he need s
1) ACID relational storage
2) Power of good RDBMS system (postgresql for example)
3) Power of some very hight level language and compiled (haskell for
example) for stored
Studying the paper *A Simple Implementation for Priority Search Queues*, by
Ralf Hinze, I came across the following syntax that I didn't understand and
I couldn't use in GHCi 7.0.3 for defining a binding data type (page 3):
Bindings are represented by the following data type:
*data k - p = k - p*
On Wednesday 24 August 2011, 20:24:14, Armando Blancas wrote:
Studying the paper *A Simple Implementation for Priority Search Queues*,
by Ralf Hinze, I came across the following syntax that I didn't
understand and I couldn't use in GHCi 7.0.3 for defining a binding data
type (page 3):
On Aug 24, 2011, at 1:43 PM, Permjacov Evgeniy wrote:
Ok, I know, I want something strange. But consider situation, when one
is starting a project and finds, that he need s
1) ACID relational storage
2) Power of good RDBMS system (postgresql for example)
3) Power of some very hight level
I didn't see that claim in the linked slides, and it's not Haskell '98
(nor
Haskell 2010).
I didn't realize it linked to the slides; I thought that pointed to the
article. I just found another version of the paper, A Simple Implementation
Technique for Priority Search Queues, by Hinze,
I'm using Repa to process a ton of MRI data. The basic process is,
* Read in the data
* Create a big 'ol data structure (grid) from it
* Compute the output in parallel using 'traverse'
* Write the output to file
However, during the last step, I'm getting,
$ ./bin/spline3 +RTS -N4
On 8/24/11 5:03 PM, Armando Blancas wrote:
I didn't see that claim in the linked slides, and it's not Haskell '98
(nor Haskell 2010).
I didn't realize it linked to the slides; I thought that pointed to the
article. I just found another version of the paper, A Simple Implementation
Technique
Welcome to issue 196 of the HWN, a newsletter covering developments in
the Haskell community. This release covers the week of August 14 to
20, 2011. [1] http://goo.gl/8hDku
New and Updated Projects
* graphziz (Update - Ivan Lazar Miljenovic) Wraper around
Graphviz.
[2]
Thanks for reporting this. I understand the problem, however I don't
want to bloat the interface even more with a bunch of strict versions
of functions. Even so, the current implementation is definitely the
worst possible option as it has the slow performance of building
thunks without the
Thanks for the info; that's good to know. The ICFP '01 version uses pairs;
not sure when the other came out or where.
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:46 PM, wren ng thornton w...@freegeek.org wrote:
On 8/24/11 5:03 PM, Armando Blancas wrote:
I didn't see that claim in the linked slides, and it's
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
I was just trying to remember some of the tricks Daniel Peebles (aka
{co}pumpkin) used to do in #haskell with Data.List.genericLength.
I've never really used ListLike, but was just trying to guess why the
Message: 17
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:02:49 +0300
From: Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com
Subject: [Haskell-cafe] Lifting an enumerator
To: Haskell Cafe haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Cc: John Millikin jmilli...@gmail.com
Message-ID:
On 25/08/2011, at 7:15 , Michael Orlitzky wrote:
I'm using Repa to process a ton of MRI data. The basic process is,
* Read in the data
* Create a big 'ol data structure (grid) from it
* Compute the output in parallel using 'traverse'
* Write the output to file
However, during the
do, a block, a monad block
rec, a knot tied in the block
mu, a name that calls itself (mu is pronounced as me in modern Greek)
forM_, a long long list to run
SO, a state aborting threads (SO is stack overflow)
la, a state to follow SO
T's, tranformers of monads
that will bring us back to do
On 25 August 2011 11:59, Albert Y. C. Lai tre...@vex.net wrote:
do, a block, a monad block
rec, a knot tied in the block
mu, a name that calls itself (mu is pronounced as me in modern Greek)
forM_, a long long list to run
SO, a state aborting threads (SO is stack overflow)
la, a state to
bob zhang wrote:
I thought the right type for ContT should be
newtype ContT m a = ContT {runContT :: forall r. (a- m r) - m r}
and
other control operators
shift :: Monad m = (forall r . (a- ContT m r) - ContT m r) - ContT m a
reset :: Monad m = ContT m a - ContT m a
callCC :: ((a- (forall
42 matches
Mail list logo
