Thanks to all who helped me with my query about functional dependencies
- much appreciated. And special thanks to Bulat for reminding me
that the GHC user guide is more than just a user guide. :-)
Alexis.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Hi all,
i'm having some trouble 'getting' functional dependencies in the Haskell
context (although my understanding of them in the context of relational
database theory isn't that great either). Could someone please point me
to an introduction / tutorial in this regard?
Thanks!
Alexis.
On Tuesday 14 August 2007 00:22, L.Guo wrote:
2) We have this type definition :
pureSieve :: Int - Int
Why there is no error (type mismatch) of this call in func main :
pureSieve 1000
The Haskell Report says that an Int covers at least the range [- 2^29, 2^29 -
1], which that
On Thursday 02 August 2007 15:57, ok wrote:
It all depends on what you mean make sense to.
I can tell my student that (an instance of Monad) is a type constructor
applications of which support certain operations that must satisfy
certain operations. They can memorise that. But it remains
On Wednesday 01 August 2007 17:02, Kaveh Shahbazian wrote:
This is about to put a definition/description to test. So please cooperate!
;)
Is this a useful – sufficient, not complete – definition/description for a
monad; for an imperative mind: (?)
A monad is like a loop that can run a new
On Thursday 02 August 2007 08:17, Claus Reinke wrote:
a Monad is a type constructor with two operations, implementing
a standard interface and following a few simple rules.
. . . . and this is one of the best definitions i've seen yet. Thanks Claus!
i think we need to be looking at What is a
On Saturday 14 July 2007 05:21, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Still, while the concept is simple, it's hard to sum up in just a few
words what a monad is. (Especially given that Haskell has so many
different ones - and they seem superficially to bear no resemblence to
each other.)
Well, how about
On Thursday 12 July 2007 22:57, Steve Downey wrote:
Almost, I think. A functor is a mapping from the arrows, or morphisms,
in a category to arrows in a category.
Oops, yes, indeed. Good catch, thanks. :-)
Alexis.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
On Thursday 12 July 2007 04:40, Andrew Coppin wrote:
I once sat down and tried to read about Category Theory. I got almost
nowhere though; I cannot for the life of my figure out how the
definition of category is actually different from the definition of
set. Or how a functor is any different
On Wednesday 11 July 2007 05:49, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Last time I checked, nobody was keen on using 64 bits per
character...
Hence the UTF-8 encoding:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utf-8
Alexis.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On Tuesday 03 July 2007 09:51, Arie Peterson wrote:
No, there is a 'State s' monad provided (for arbitrary state type 's'),
which implements the 'get' and 'put' methods. In other words, 'State s' is
an instance of the 'MonadState s' class. This terminology can be really
confusing at first.
On Sunday 01 July 2007 09:34, Gregory Propf wrote:
Thanks, that was helpful. I didn't realize that there were pure functional
monads.
Neither did i; the general impression i'd got after almost a year of trying to
learn Haskell was: Monad Eisley Spaceport. You will never find a more
wretched
On Saturday 23 June 2007 08:18, Chad Scherrer wrote:
Now, the UNIX command doesn't really cut it, because it complains there are
too many files,
Sounds like a case for xargs(1)?
Alexis.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 10:30, Pete Kazmier wrote:
From a
practical point of view, the tasks that I do frequently involve the
use of regexps (for better or worse).
Likewise. It's true that when regexps are readily available, everything can
look like a hammer; but sometimes a nail is just a
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 14:48, Alexis Hazell wrote:
Likewise. It's true that when regexps are readily available, everything can
look like a hammer; but sometimes a nail is just a nail. :-)
Er. i meant to say, when the regexp /hammer/ is readily available, everything
can look like a /nail
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 07:43 pm, Daniel McAllansmith wrote:
On Tuesday 28 November 2006 20:50, Alexis Hazell wrote:
i don't understand why i need to specify type signatures when they should
already be in scope?
Is this a result of the monomorphism restriction?
Er . . . . i hadn't heard
Hi all,
i'm having a bit of difficulty using GHCi to try out HXT.
i brought the Text.XML.HXT.Arrow module into scope using :m. Then i entered:
let contact = mkelem stream:stream [ sattr xmlns:stream
http://etherx.jabber.org/streams;, sattr xmlns jabber:client, sattr to
livejournal.com
17 matches
Mail list logo
