Excerpts from Albert Y.C.Lai's message of Mon Jun 28 15:44:34 -0400 2010:
I propose that at each minor version of base, someone picks an implementation
randomly.
This has actually been done, in a legitimate language implementation.
Check out:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 07:44:34PM +, Albert Y.C.Lai wrote:
I propose that at each minor version of base, someone picks an implementation
randomly.
Here is a more radical, less labour-intensive solution, if you don't mind a
judicious, correctness-preserving use of unsafePerformIO: at the
Hello Chris,
Chris Brown wrote:
we are pleased to announce the availability of HaRe 0.6
Great, I want to try it!
While skimming the installation instructions I wondered why I couldn't
just do
cabal install HaRe
Are there any problems with putting HaRe on Hackage?
I will probably
Hi Michael
If you going to the trouble of constructing a sum type (obliged to be
2 parameter) expressly to play well with the favourite single
parameter classes e.g. Functor/ Applicative / Monad [*], maybe it is
worth considering new names for the type and its constructors relating
to what the
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Stephen Tetley
stephen.tet...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Michael
If you going to the trouble of constructing a sum type (obliged to be
2 parameter) expressly to play well with the favourite single
parameter classes e.g. Functor/ Applicative / Monad [*], maybe it is
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 19:29 -0700, Michael Vanier wrote:
Hi,
Quick question about ghci: when I do this at the prompt:
ghci :m +Control.Monad.Cont
I get
Ambiguous module name `Control.Monad.Cont':
it was found in multiple packages: mtl-1.1.0.2 monads-fd-0.0.0.1
Is there
Maybe it is because deleteBy is defined wrongly? i.e. it is not logical,
doesn't follow the common sense user might expect. It accepts any predicate
but narrows requirements only in docs.
Maybe best could be to just take a value for comparison and use == against
it? (overloaded or built-in (I'm
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 10:47:40, Zura_ wrote:
Maybe it is because deleteBy is defined wrongly? i.e. it is not logical,
doesn't follow the common sense user might expect. It accepts any
predicate but narrows requirements only in docs.
Unfortunately, you can't easily encode the requirement that
Sebastian Fischer s...@informatik.uni-kiel.de writes:
Hello Chris,
Chris Brown wrote:
we are pleased to announce the availability of HaRe 0.6
Great, I want to try it!
While skimming the installation instructions I wondered why I couldn't
just do
cabal install HaRe
Are there any
Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@web.de writes:
Maybe it is because deleteBy is defined wrongly? i.e. it is not logical,
doesn't follow the common sense user might expect. It accepts any
predicate but narrows requirements only in docs.
Unfortunately, you can't easily encode the requirement
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Ketil Malde ke...@malde.org wrote:
deleteBy :: (a - Bool) - [a] - [a]
I don't think there would be any doubt what 'deleteBy (= 5) [1..10]'
would do. And I just don't see what the requirement for an equivalence
relation buys you.
Your deleteBy is (filter .
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 11:46:47, Ketil Malde wrote:
An important point of a powerful type system is to model your program so
that only sensible code is legal.
That would be an awesomely powerful type system :)
This makes me wonder why deleteBy is
defined so loosely, instead of e.g.
Max Rabkin max.rab...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Ketil Malde ke...@malde.org wrote:
deleteBy :: (a - Bool) - [a] - [a]
I don't think there would be any doubt what 'deleteBy (= 5) [1..10]'
would do. And I just don't see what the requirement for an equivalence
Max Rabkin max.rab...@gmail.com writes:
Your deleteBy is (filter . not), isn't it?
With the caveat that I haven't actually used it, my impression is that
delete only removes one element, while filter removes all of them.
-k
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of
Ketil Malde ke...@malde.org writes:
Max Rabkin max.rab...@gmail.com writes:
Your deleteBy is (filter . not), isn't it?
With the caveat that I haven't actually used it, my impression is that
delete only removes one element, while filter removes all of them.
At most one element, yes; I
Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@web.de writes:
An important point of a powerful type system is to model your program so
that only sensible code is legal.
That would be an awesomely powerful type system :)
Heh. But while we're waiting for it, we can try to use what we got to
eliminate as
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 12:46:21, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
At most one element, yes; I question why that design decision was made
as I'm more likely to want to delete all values rather than just the
first one
That's more common, yes (I don't remember ever having used delete(By)
Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@web.de writes:
That's more common, yes (I don't remember ever having used delete(By)
intentionally). But we've filter for that, so it wouldn't make sense to
give delete(By) the same semantics. Hence, if you provide both names, what
else could deleteBy do?
Hi Michael
Good names are a problem of course.
The Applicative Programming with Effects Paper has the monodial
accumulating applicative instance on a sum type Conor McBride and
Ross Paterson call Except:
data Except err a = OK a | Failed err
The names are nice and to the point, but they would
Ketil Malde schrieb:
[...]
I don't think there would be any doubt what 'deleteBy (= 5) [1..10]'
would do.
Well, if you don't know about filter, you could think it deletes all
elements satisfying the predicate, but apart from that, it's clear.
I'd probably call it 'filter1', but that's just
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 12:50:34, Ketil Malde wrote:
Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@web.de writes:
An important point of a powerful type system is to model your program
so that only sensible code is legal.
That would be an awesomely powerful type system :)
Heh. But while we're
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 13:02:20, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
That's like asking why we have mapM and forM, etc.
Yes, why?
(okay, I use forM too, it's so much more readable with a short list and a
long action)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@web.de writes:
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 13:02:20, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
That's like asking why we have mapM and forM, etc.
Yes, why?
(okay, I use forM too, it's so much more readable with a short list and a
long action)
Exactly; using deleteBy p
Hi Sebastian,
Great, I want to try it!
Thanks for you interest!
While skimming the installation instructions I wondered why I couldn't just do
cabal install HaRe
Are there any problems with putting HaRe on Hackage?
I've looked at this before and I must say it's certainly not
Hi Ivan,
I've tried playing with an older version of HaRe; it's build system is a
little weird but I'm sure it can be converted into a Cabal-compatible
format. Part of the problem if memory serves is the use of embedded
libraries that aren't on Hackage either.
That's correct. HaRe builds
* Stephen Tetley stephen.tet...@gmail.com [2010-06-29 12:02:45+0100]
The Applicative Programming with Effects Paper has the monodial
accumulating applicative instance on a sum type Conor McBride and
Ross Paterson call Except:
data Except err a = OK a | Failed err
The names are nice and to
2010/6/29 Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info:
* Stephen Tetley stephen.tet...@gmail.com [2010-06-29 12:02:45+0100]
The Applicative Programming with Effects Paper has the monodial
accumulating applicative instance on a sum type Conor McBride and
Ross Paterson call Except:
data Except err a = OK
Chris BROWN chr...@cs.st-andrews.ac.uk writes:
Of course, it would also be nice if HaRe could parse more than just
Haskell98... :p (I know, I know, it isn't easy to change parsers,
etc.).
HaRe works over the full Haskell 98 standard. We certainly wish to
move HaRe over to GHC Haskell in
On 29 Jun 2010, at 15:55, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
Chris BROWN chr...@cs.st-andrews.ac.uk writes:
Of course, it would also be nice if HaRe could parse more than just
Haskell98... :p (I know, I know, it isn't easy to change parsers,
etc.).
HaRe works over the full Haskell 98
Chris Brown wrote:
Are there any problems with putting HaRe on Hackage?
I've looked at this before and I must say it's certainly not trivial
to do this. [...] We also need to have vim and emacs scripts
available to the user after the install.
The ghc-mod package [1] provides emacs
* Vo Minh Thu not...@gmail.com [2010-06-29 16:26:06+0200]
2010/6/29 Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info:
* Stephen Tetley stephen.tet...@gmail.com [2010-06-29 12:02:45+0100]
The Applicative Programming with Effects Paper has the monodial
accumulating applicative instance on a sum type Conor
On Jun 29, 2010, at 6:02 AM, Stephen Tetley wrote:
Hi Michael
Good names are a problem of course.
The Applicative Programming with Effects Paper has the monodial
accumulating applicative instance on a sum type Conor McBride and
Ross Paterson call Except:
data Except err a = OK a | Failed err
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 02:56:18PM -0500, Jeremy Shaw wrote:
On Jun 29, 2010, at 6:02 AM, Stephen Tetley wrote:
The Applicative Programming with Effects Paper has the monodial
accumulating applicative instance on a sum type Conor McBride and
Ross Paterson call Except:
data Except err a = OK
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:01:54 +0200, Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com
wrote:
Comments on the draft report are welcome, before I finalise this and
sign off on Haskell 2010.
Subsection 12.3, Language extensions, mentions the FFI as a language
extension, but FFI is now part of the standerd;
Chris BROWN chr...@cs.st-andrews.ac.uk writes:
On 29 Jun 2010, at 15:55, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
I talked with you and Simon Thompson about this at PEPM, and at the time
you said that haskell-src-exts didn't have what you needed for HaRe.
What exactly do you need in a parser for it to be
Hi all,
I'm reading John Hughes' paper Generalizing Monads to Arrows and found
the statement regarding parser combinators:
... depend on the programmer using an additional combinator similar
to Prolog's 'cut' operator do declare that a parser need never
backtrack beyond a certain point.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo
mle...@mega-nerd.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm reading John Hughes' paper Generalizing Monads to Arrows and found
the statement regarding parser combinators:
... depend on the programmer using an additional combinator similar
to Prolog's
Antoine Latter wrote:
For Parsec, in the absence of the try combinator, a parser will
never back-track once it consumes a portion of the input.
Thanks for reminding me.
If try is pushed out into the leaves of you parser, you shouldn't
run in to too much trouble with excessive backtracking.
38 matches
Mail list logo
