In general you can't do this whether you use pats of QuickCheck or not
- `randomEvalute` would need to inspect the supplied function to see
how many input parameters it has so it can list them, but there is no
such introspection in Haskell.
___
* Stephen Tetley stephen.tet...@gmail.com [2013-01-13 08:49:08+]
In general you can't do this whether you use pats of QuickCheck or not
- `randomEvalute` would need to inspect the supplied function to see
how many input parameters it has so it can list them, but there is no
such
Yes - I was just checking the first QuickCheck paper to see how the
authors did this.
You would need a new type class that works like `Testable` and the
versions of associated machinery `forAll` and `evaluate` to unroll
function application.
On 13 January 2013 09:28, Roman Cheplyaka
I have a working code of this but for that I have to reimplement Arbitrary
and Testable typeclasses which I don't want to do. I thought it might be
possible to use parts of quickcheck without actually changing its code but
still I am unable to find a suitable solution.
-Satvik
On Sun, Jan 13,
Morning Cafe,
I'm planning to do a series of write-ups about Category Theory, to publish
them on the company's blog I'm currently employed.
I'm not a CT expert, but since the best way to learn something is to
explain it to others, I want to take a shot :)
In my mind I will structure the posts
I think it's more complicated because he doesn't know what the return type
or arity of the function is. In QuickCheck they know the return type of a
property is Bool. In this case, we only know that the return type is an
instance of Show. I don't think that's enough to simply implement this.
On
Hi,
Am Sonntag, den 13.01.2013, 07:34 -0800 schrieb Bob Ippolito:
I think it's more complicated because he doesn't know what the return
type or arity of the function is. In QuickCheck they know the return
type of a property is Bool. In this case, we only know that the return
type is an
There was a conversation on the cafe about this last month. Check out:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/haskell-cafe/tBO2AowUvMY
Category theory is a language of composition. In logical terms,
different categories are models of different axioms. That said, a rich
enough category is
Thank you Alexander for the reply.
My wondering is: is Hask a category created by Haskell researchers or was
something already present in literature?
Cheers,
A.
On 13 January 2013 17:44, Alexander Solla alex.so...@gmail.com wrote:
There was a conversation on the cafe about this last month.
I sometimes run into trouble with lack of injectivity for type families.
I'm trying to understand what's at the heart of these difficulties and
whether I can avoid them. Also, whether some of the obstacles could be
overcome with simple improvements to GHC.
Here's a simple example:
{-# LANGUAGE
Hello Conal,
The issue with your example is that it is ambiguous, so GHC can't figure
out how to instantiate the use of `foo`. It might be easier to see why
this is if you write it in this form:
foo :: (F a ~ b) = b
foo = ...
Now, we can see that only `b` appears on the RHS of the `=`, so
Hi Iavor,
Thanks for the remarks.
so there is really no way for GHC to figure out what is the intended value
for `a`.
Indeed. Though I wonder: does the type-checker really need to find a
binding for `a` in this case, i.e., given the equation `(forall a. F a) ==
(forall a'. F a')`?
-- Conal
Hi Christian,
Given bar :: Bool, I can't see how one could go from Bool to F a =
Bool and determine a uniquely.
The same question applies to foo :: Bool, right? Yet no error message
there.
Regards, - Conal
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Christian Höner zu Siederdissen
Hi all,
I'm working on a library for fast sorting of MArrays. The library is
primarily about speed, so I added
ghc-options: -O2
to the cabal file. Now cabal sdist complains with:
'ghc-options: -O2' is rarely needed. Check that it is giving a real
benefit and not just imposing longer
Hello,
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Conal Elliott co...@conal.net wrote:
so there is really no way for GHC to figure out what is the intended value
for `a`.
Indeed. Though I wonder: does the type-checker really need to find a
binding for `a` in this case, i.e., given the equation
Greetings to all!
Currently I'm trying to do physical simulations using finite difference
method. To accomplish this I need to repeat some manipulations on
2-dimensional grid several thousands or millions times, you know. Is it
possible to do using repa?
I wrote this rough sketch that shows what
I have a trick that loses a little convenience, but may still be more
convenient than data families.
{-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies #-}
import Data.Tagged
type family F a
foo :: Tagged a (F a)
foo = Tagged undefined
bar :: Tagged a (F a)
bar = foo
This allows you to use the same newtype wrapper
On Sunday 13 January 2013, 21:27:44, Petr P wrote:
I wonder:
(1) Is there a way how to disable the warning? As the main aim of the
library is speed, I believe -O2 is appropriate here. And since the code is
quite short, I'm quite sure the increased compile time won't be noticeable.
(2)
On 13 January 2013 20:27, Petr P petr@gmail.com wrote:
to the cabal file. Now cabal sdist complains with:
'ghc-options: -O2' is rarely needed. Check that it is giving a real
benefit and not just imposing longer compile times on your users.
I wonder:
(1) Is there a way how to
On 1/13/13 12:44 PM, Alexander Solla wrote:
Hask is a very rich category, and is suitable for encoding a lot (but not
all) of category theory. As far as I know, the actual boundary is as yet
unknown.
I'm not sure that's the most appropriate way to render things. In
general, rich categories
On 1/13/13 1:53 PM, Alfredo Di Napoli wrote:
Thank you Alexander for the reply.
My wondering is: is Hask a category created by Haskell researchers or was
something already present in literature?
Hask was created by Haskellers in discussions on blogs etc. If one is
being particular about the
On 01/13/2013 03:15 AM, Alfredo Di Napoli wrote:
Morning Cafe,
I'm planning to do a series of write-ups about Category Theory, to
publish them on the company's blog I'm currently employed.
I'm not a CT expert, but since the best way to learn something is to
explain it to others, I want to
On 1/13/13 3:52 PM, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Conal Elliott co...@conal.net wrote:
so there is really no way for GHC to figure out what is the intended value
for `a`.
Indeed. Though I wonder: does the type-checker really need to find a
binding for `a` in this
I used the MinGW32 RPMs included in Fedora to get Gtk3
working on Windows. So no more Gtk2 unless you really
want it (in which case use -f-gtk3 when building).
Issue with Pane - HLint not working in the binary versions
should be fixed with these too.
OS X
Choose the version that matches
24 matches
Mail list logo
