On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is that I have *no idea* how to begin debugging this. In
C, Python, or any other imperative language, I'd put traces in, etc.
But in Haskell, I don't even know where to start.
One of the standard modules is
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
That's odd, it seems to be saying it's not installed at all! Hmm, no -
I did a cabal install --user (because Vista doesn't let me do
site-wide installs), looks like cabal list doesn't pick up user
installs.
Hmm, cabal
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is that I have *no idea* how to begin debugging this.
I've had great success debugging a large program by loading the Main
module into ghci after setting GHC extensions, changing the search
path, and setting
On 2009-09-28 22:53 -0400 (Mon), John D. Ramsdell wrote:
I've had great success debugging a large program by loading the Main
module into ghci after setting GHC extensions, changing the search
path, and setting break on errors. If you then place calls to the
error function at the right
I'm still playing round with my random dieroll generation program. In
doing so, I just hit a segmentation fault (I didn't think Haskell
could *cause* a segfault!) I'm sure it's my code - I got this to
compile by fiddling with types until the errors (which I didn't
understand) went away. Certainly
2009/9/27 Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com:
I'm still playing round with my random dieroll generation program. In
doing so, I just hit a segmentation fault (I didn't think Haskell
could *cause* a segfault!) I'm sure it's my code - I got this to
compile by fiddling with types until the errors
2009/9/27 andy morris a...@adradh.org.uk:
mersenne-random uses the FFI, so it's probably that. I just ran your
code with mersenne-random-1.0 and didn't get a segfault. What version
are you using?
Not entirely sure, I just did a cabal install a short while back.
cabal list mersenne
Warning:
Am Sonntag 27 September 2009 22:02:45 schrieb andy morris:
mersenne-random uses the FFI, so it's probably that. I just ran your
code with mersenne-random-1.0 and didn't get a segfault.
Yup, works here, too. And everything but mersenne-random should be fool-proof.
What version are you using?
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Joe English [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Me either; in fact even 1/4 of the time debugging
sounds quite high.
When I first started using Haskell, most of my time
went to fighting with the typechecker, but once the
code checked it almost
Dave Tweed wrote:
If you discard `compliation preventing, very very quick to solve' bugs
(e.g., missing semi-colons in C++, silly typecheck errors in Haskell) I
find that the ratio between source code bugs and algorithm bugs is maybe
1:5. This means that whilst I find Haskell a great deal
the time I spend debugging Haskell and time spent
debugging C++ because language independent bugs are the bottleneck.
So in my case I couldn't justify using Haskell on the grounds of reduced
debugging time. (I could justify it on lots of other grounds of course...)
Well, I'd like to point out
Joe English [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sengan Baring-Gould wrote:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/taoup/html/ch01s06.html
states that debugging often occupies three-quarters or more
of development time. I don't think that is my experience
in Haskell... more like 1/4 at most. I was
http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/taoup/html/ch01s06.html
states that debugging often occupies three-quarters or more of development time.
I don't think that is my experience in Haskell... more like 1/4 at most. I was
wondering what others felt.
Sengan
Good day everyone, I was fiddling around with this tiny echo
client/server haskell program from 'The Great Language Shootout'
site (http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/) and got stuck.
The code (attached) has been reformatted with minimal API tweak
(mkPortNumber, writeSocket, readSocket) to
14 matches
Mail list logo
