Hello all! This is my first message to the list.
In my work I often need linear algebra algorithms and other numeric
computations. An option is using scientific computing systems like Matlab,
Mathematica, Maple, etc. In Haskell there are several modules and bindings to
matrix libraries; many
As a self-taught Haskell programmer of about a year, I'm really
interested in seeing your colleague's code. I'd like to know what I
did wrong. How about after two weeks? I think that's reasonable!
-Arjun
On Jun 28, 2005, at 20:05 , Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 12:11
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
In my work I often need linear algebra algorithms and other numeric
computations.
Nice coincidence:
http://www.haskell.org//pipermail/libraries/2005-June/003936.html
An option is using scientific computing systems like Matlab,
Mathematica, Maple,
Am 29. Jun 2005 um 11.03 Uhr schrieb Simon Marlow:
On 28 June 2005 14:11, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
3) many users complaining about non-compatibility between GHC
versions. if they mean library interfaces changes then how about using
Pesco's library versioning scheme? (see
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 12:31, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
In my work I often need linear algebra algorithms and other numeric
computations.
Nice coincidence:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 12:31, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
In my work I often need linear algebra algorithms and other numeric
computations.
Nice
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 01:38:51PM +0200, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
Wow! It is exactly the same idea! I did not find the above message by
Keean in my google searchs when I decided to work on this, it is very
recent! After a quick look to the thread I wish I would have followed the
discussions... A
[ Apologies for multiple postings; please forward to potentially
interested parties ]
CUFP 2005
THE SECOND COMMERCIAL USERS OF FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMMING WORKSHOP
Talinn, Estonia
September 24th 2005
Hello Simon,
Wednesday, June 29, 2005, 1:03:06 PM, you wrote:
1) GHCi compiles to bytecode several times faster than GHC makes
unoptimized compilation. can unoptimized GHC compilation just create
bytecode (as Ocaml does)?
SM Do you really mean several times faster? My impression is that
I would recommend that you look very closely at the design of the
LinearAlgebra package, the Matrix and Vector constructors, and the
underlying implementation data-structure rtable() for Maple's
implementation of all these ideas. About 250 person-days were spent on
just the high-level design,
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Jacques Carette wrote:
9. There are row vectors and column vectors, and these are different
types. You get type errors if you mix them incorrectly.
What do you mean with row vectors and column vectors are different
types? Do you mean that in a well designed library they
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Jacques Carette wrote:
9. There are row vectors and column vectors, and these are different
types. You get type errors if you mix them incorrectly.
What do you mean with row vectors and column vectors are different
types? Do you mean
Henning:
I was wrong, the different names are synonymes for the same type. :-(
I agree that we must statically distinguish Vector and Matrix (see below).
Some notes: I would not call it a matrix library but a linear algebra
library. Then setup modules like LinearAlgebra.Matrix,
On row column vectors, do you really want to think of them as
{1,...,n)-R? They often represent linear maps from R^n to R or R to
R^n, which are very different types. Similarly, instead of working with
matrices, how about linear maps from R^n to R^m? In this view, column
and row vectors,
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Jacques Carette wrote:
Distinction of row and column vectors is a misconcept
Row and column vectors are sometimes worth distinguishing because they can
represent entirely different types of object. For example, if a column vector
represents an element of a vector space V
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Jacques Carette wrote:
If we instead distinguish row and column vectors because we treat them as
matrices, then the quadratic form
x^T * A * x
denotes a 1x1 matrix, not a real.
But if you consider x to be a vector without orientation, writing down
x^T is
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Dan Piponi wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Jacques Carette wrote:
Distinction of row and column vectors is a misconcept
Row and column vectors are sometimes worth distinguishing because they
can represent entirely different types of object. For example, if a
column vector
Henning Thielemann wrote:
Mathematical notation has the problem that it doesn't distinguish between
things that are different but in turn discriminates things which are
essentially the same.
I used to think that too. And while that is sometimes true, it is
actually quite rare! When common
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Conal Elliott wrote:
On row column vectors, do you really want to think of them as
{1,...,n)-R? They often represent linear maps from R^n to R or R to
R^n, which are very different types. Similarly, instead of working with
matrices, how about linear maps from R^n to
I'm interested in using haskell to do static analysis of java bytecode.
To my surprise, I wasn't able to find any existing haskell libraries for
parsing java .class files. Is anyone aware of such a library?
I've already started writing my own implementation, which I intend to make
available
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Jacques Carette wrote:
In fact, type classes in Haskell is a *great* way to do just that!
I agree. I'm also aware of that I mean different objects when I write
uniformly '1'. But I know that they are somehow different. I'm also ok
with not writing a conversion from say the
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Jacques Carette wrote:
sarcasmNext thing you know, you'll want a different 'application'
symbol for every arity of function, because they are ``different''.
/sarcasm
Btw. there is less sarcasm in it as may you think. There was already a
proposal to extend function
Jacques Carette writes:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
I don't see the problem. There are three very different kinds of
multiplication, they should also have their own signs: Scalar product,
matrix-vector multiplication, matrix-matrix multiplication.
You see 3 concepts, I see one:
Kimberley Burchett writes:
I'm interested in using haskell to do static analysis of java bytecode. To
my surprise, I wasn't able to find any existing haskell libraries for
parsing java .class files.
Now I am surprised.
Why for goodness' sake, people interested in Haskell *should* worry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the things I appreciate and I hate simultaneously in your postings
is that you are so categorical.
'tis indeed simultaneously one of my strengths and one of my weaknesses
;-) I also like to play Devil's Advocate, to draw out the interesting
arguments.
G'day all.
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Now I am surprised.
Why for goodness' sake, people interested in Haskell *should* worry
about parsing of Java bytecode chunks?
Upgrading legacy code, of course.
Cheers,
Andrew Bromage
legacy: adj.
Perjorative term used to describe any technology
Henning Thielemann wrote:
I'm also aware of that I mean different objects when I write
uniformly '1'. But I know that they are somehow different.
Since '1' can safely be used to denote the unit of any monoid, it does
indeed have a lot of applications. And of course the syntactic artifact
27 matches
Mail list logo
