At Thu, 18 May 2006 02:37:56 -0700,
Juan Carlos Arevalo Baeza wrote:
I'd be worried about the performance you can get from this
breadth-first approach. I sort of like the fine-tuning control that the
try approach gives in parsec. I'll finish the paper before giving this
any more
Try this simple program:
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec
ppAny = tokenPrim show (\p _ _ - p) (\t - Just t)
ppTest = many ppAny
p s =
case runParser ppTest True s of
Left error - show error
Right result - result
main = do let fname = C:/main.i
f -
big memory leak ... two parsers in sequenceA related question, are these two equivalents?foldl2 f g y z lst = (foldl f y lst, foldl g z lst)foldl2' f g y z lst = foldl (\(i, j) x - (f i x, g j x)) (y, z) lst
If no, is there some strictness that can be added to make them
equivalent? And if so,
At Wed, 17 May 2006 11:36:00 -0700,
Juan Carlos Arevalo Baeza wrote:
Is there any known alternative that doesn't exhibit this behavior? It
would have to somehow return errors inline or on a side channel. I'll
be toying with this sort of thing for a while.
You might try reading,
Polish
