Well, I took Bardur's suggestion and avoided all the complexities of GHC's
IO stack and simply used System.Posix.IO and Foreign.This appears to
work, but for better or worse, it is using blocking calls to the read
system call and is not integrated with GHC's IO manager. This shouldn't
be
Thank you, MigMit!
If I replace your type FoldSTVoid with:
data FoldMVoid = FoldMVoid {runFold :: Monad m = (Int - m ()) - m ()}
then everything works magically with any monad!
That is exactly what I wanted, though I still do not quite understand why
wrapping the type solves the problem
Dmitry
The example is assuming you have an import statement like this:
import qualified Sound.Sox.Option.Format as Option
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Gary Klindt gary.kli...@googlemail.com wrote:
Dear Cafe,
after installing the Sox library
(cabal install sox)
I wanted to let run a minimal
Hi
I have some input parameters
data Input = ...
that I need the user to enter in a gui pop-up. (windows people...)
The rest of the app is not gui (or perhaps progress could be displayed
in a log-window)
What is the easiest way to make such a GUI form?
It need to compile for both Linux and
Hi there Rune,
if you want to get started with declarative GUI programming in Haskell,
I really recommend taking the FRP route. Check out the
reactive-banana-wx [1] library instead of using wxHaskell directly. If
you manage to get wxHaskell working on Windows, then reactive-banana
will work as
Good point. Done.
On 29.11.12 06:16, Conrad Parker wrote:
#REDIRECT [[IDEs]]
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
I'm very interested in FRP, but all the examples I could see was
forms with live feedback
gui like a real-time calculator.
This is a one-time form where the user fills everything in, clicks on a button,
where after the computations might take a long time, perhaps display
some console-info.
But
Rune Harder Bak r...@bak.dk wrote:
I'm very interested in FRP, but all the examples I could see was forms
with live feedback gui like a real-time calculator.
This is a one-time form where the user fills everything in, clicks on
a button, where after the computations might take a long time,
Nathan Hüsken wrote:
Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
Personally, I would recommend is a complete change in perspective.
The main idea of FRP is that it is a method to describe the evolution of
values in time. What is a game? It's just a picture that evolves in
time. The user can exert influence on
Ben Franksen ben.frank...@online.de writes:
just wanted to drop by to say how much I like the new lambda case extension.
I use it all the time and I just *love* how it relieves me from conjuring up
dummy variables, which makes teh code not only esier to write but also to
read.
[…] should
Hi all haskellers
I every now and then get the feeling that doing my job code in Haskell would be
a good idea.
I have tried a couple of times, but each time I seem to run into performance
problems - I do lots of heavy computing.
The problem seems to be connected to lazy loading, which makes
Hi there,
I'm only an amateur so just my 2 cent: Haskell can be really fast, but
reaching that speed can be all but trivial: you need to use different data
types (e.g. ByteString vs. the normal String type) relies on
unconventional IO (e.g. Conduit, Iterateee) and still be ready to go out
of the
I know it's not wx, but if you were willing to use GTK, you could simply
install:
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/gtk-jsinput
and generate the form automatically as described in:
https://github.com/timthelion/gtk-jsinput/blob/master/Graphics/UI/Gtk/
Custom/JSInput.hs
Timothy
Hi Felix,
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Fixie Fixie
fixie.fi...@rocketmail.com wrote:
The problem seems to be connected to lazy loading, which makes my programs
so slow that I really can not show them to anyone. I have tried all tricks
in the books, like !, seq, non-lazy datatypes...
My
I hear you, my friend.
What I love of Haskell is that a lot of algorithms are very clean to
express and understand compared to, say, Lisp or C. Compared to Lisp,
function manipulation is also very clean (even compared to Racket). A great
plus is also type inference.
The bad side is that direct
If you can give an example of some underperforming code, I'm sure someone
(or several people) on this list would be more than happy to help you make
it more performant.
Generally, it doesn't take much. It's all in knowing where to look. Also,
if you know performance is key, you should be using
Oh, my - what an indentation :-)
New try:
- Videresendt melding
Fra: Fixie Fixie fixie.fi...@rocketmail.com
Til: haskell-cafe@haskell.org haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Kopi: Clark Gaebel cgae...@uwaterloo.ca
Sendt: Torsdag, 29. november 2012 20.57
Emne: Vedr: [Haskell-cafe] To my boss: The
Ack, it seems like you're running into one of these bugs (all now
fixed, but I don't know in which GHC version):
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/search?q=doubleFromInteger
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
The program seems to take around 6 seconds on my linux-box, while the c version
goes for 0.06 sekcond.
That is really some regression bug :-)
Anyone with a more recent version thatn 7.4.1?
Felix
Fra: Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com
Til: Fixie Fixie
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fixie Fixie fixie.fi...@rocketmail.com wrote:
The program seems to take around 6 seconds on my linux-box, while the c
version goes for 0.06 sekcond.
That is really some regression bug :-)
Anyone with a more recent version thatn 7.4.1?
On 7.4.2:
$ time
That's really an argument for upgrading to 7.4.2 :-)
Another reason for doing things with haskell is this mailing list.
Thanks!
Felix
Fra: Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com
Til: Fixie Fixie fixie.fi...@rocketmail.com
Kopi: Haskell cafe
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Fixie Fixie fixie.fi...@rocketmail.com wrote:
That's really an argument for upgrading to 7.4.2 :-)
Another reason for doing things with haskell is this mailing list.
FYI I'm still looking into this issue as I'm not 100% happy with the
code GHC generates.
On Donnerstag, 29. November 2012, 21:00:36, Fixie Fixie wrote:
The program seems to take around 6 seconds on my linux-box, while the c
version goes for 0.06 sekcond.
That is really some regression bug :-)
Anyone with a more recent version thatn 7.4.1?
I don't even have a problem with
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Daniel Fischer
daniel.is.fisc...@googlemail.com wrote:
We have an unpleasant regression in comparison to 7.2.* and the 7.4.* were
slower than 7.6.1 is, but it's all okay here (not that it wouldn't be nice to
have it faster still).
Are you on a 32-bit system?
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com wrote:
This version works around the Word-Double conversion bug and shows
good performance:
I'd also like to point out that I've removed lots of bang patterns
that weren't needed. This program runs fine without any bang
On Donnerstag, 29. November 2012, 13:40:42, Johan Tibell wrote:
word2Double :: Word - Double
word2Double (W# w) = D# (int2Double# (word2Int# w))
On my (64-bit) machine the Haskell and C versions are on par.
Yes, but the result is very different.
I am looking to continue to learn Haskell while working on something that
might eventually be useful to others and get posted on Hackage. I have
written quite a bit of Haskell code now, some useful and a lot just throw
away for learning. In the past others have expressed interest in having a
On 29 November 2012 18:09, Fixie Fixie fixie.fi...@rocketmail.com wrote:
What is your experience, dear haskellers? To me it seems this beautiful
language is useless without a better lazy/eager-analyzer.
Since when has speed been the sole arbiter of utility?
10 years ago I switched from
On Donnerstag, 29. November 2012, 13:40:42, Johan Tibell wrote:
word2Double :: Word - Double
word2Double (W# w) = D# (int2Double# (word2Int# w))
On my (64-bit) machine the Haskell and C versions are on par.
On my box, the Haskell is even faster then, but, as said, the result is
incorrect
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Daniel Fischer
daniel.is.fisc...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Donnerstag, 29. November 2012, 13:40:42, Johan Tibell wrote:
word2Double :: Word - Double
word2Double (W# w) = D# (int2Double#
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:52:58AM +0100, Ben Franksen wrote:
Tony Morris wrote:
As a side note, I think a direct superclass of Functor for Monad is not
a good idea, just sayin'
class Functor f where
fmap :: (a - b) - f a - f b
class Functor f = Apply f where
(*) :: f (a -
Hi David,
David Thomas wrote:
https://github.com/dlthomas/tzcache
A small bit of code, but seems likely to be useful enough that I figured I
should share.
Thanks for sharing this!
1) Does this already exist somewhere I missed?
I haven't seen it anywhere.
2) It seems silly to make
* Yitzchak Gale g...@sefer.org [2012-11-30 00:28:45+0200]
I think the proper abstraction would be a more
general fold or traversal over a directory structure.
Some languages have something like that (e.g.,
os.walk in Python).
Check out
Brent Yorgey wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:52:58AM +0100, Ben Franksen wrote:
Tony Morris wrote:
As a side note, I think a direct superclass of Functor for Monad is not
a good idea, just sayin'
class Functor f where
fmap :: (a - b) - f a - f b
class Functor f = Apply f
Hi Mark,
I might become your user. Currently, for Agda I have rolled my own
sparse matrix implementation, see
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/Agda/latest/doc/html/src/Agda-Termination-SparseMatrix.html
Cheers,
Andreas
On 29.11.12 5:03 PM, Mark Flamer wrote:
I am looking to
I had been missing a pattern matching lambda in Haskell for a long time
(SML had fn since ages) and my typical use will be
monadic_expr = \case
branches
I think \case is not the worst choice, certainly better than of ...
Thanks to the GHC 7.6 developers!
Cheers,
Andreas
On 29.11.12
36 matches
Mail list logo
