Also, this is a complete aside but what the heck. :-)
Has anyone else been driven crazy by the way that Java code and
libraries are documented? It seems like whenever I try to figure out
how to use a piece of Java code, the functionality is spread out over a
huge collection of classes and
On 29 October 2010 17:33, Gregory Crosswhite gcr...@phys.washington.edu wrote:
Also, this is a complete aside but what the heck. :-)
Has anyone else been driven crazy by the way that Java code and libraries
are documented? It seems like whenever I try to figure out how to use a
piece of
Hi
Thanks for the help! I've made some progress, but I'm not there yet.
On 28 Oct 2010, at 20:08, Ketil Malde wrote:
Sittampalam, Ganesh ganesh.sittampa...@credit-suisse.com writes:
Have you tried passing -optl-static to ghc (which causes -static to
be
passed to ld)?
This was new to me.
Hey all,
In the recent discussion about the status of email support in Haskell,
the idea of strike forces to tackle these big problems came up. I
think one dilemma people face when trying to coordinate such a venture
is the logistics: where to organize, how to advertise it, where to
have
On 29 October 2010 19:06, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com wrote:
Hey all,
In the recent discussion about the status of email support in Haskell,
the idea of strike forces to tackle these big problems came up. I
think one dilemma people face when trying to coordinate such a venture
is the
2) If there is a problem, here's what you could do about it,
in descending order of attractiveness:
y) specify the requirements (a sample application
of what needs to be supported would be a start)
z) review the existing options wrt to those requirements
(which ones are you aware about,
Hi aditya,
thanks for the tip. No, I must admit a deal breaker it is not, giving
all the advantages of haskell on the one hand I think I'd be able to
life with something half baked.
Günther
Am 29.10.10 06:53, schrieb aditya siram:
I understand your frustration at not having free tested
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 October 2010 19:06, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com wrote:
[..]
I _really_ like this idea. With this nebulous proposal of yours, is
there any way of maybe integrating the various services
Conor McBride co...@strictlypositive.org writes:
...seemed like a good plan. I got lots of scary warnings like
(.text+0x51d8): warning: Using 'setprotoent' in statically linked
applications requires at runtime the shared libraries from the glibc
version used for linking
I guess the message
On 29 October 2010 20:19, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com wrote:
Mental note: must remember to use word nebulous more often, I like it.
As do I ;-)
Anyway, integration with existing services would be very good, but I
doubt it will be possible. I don't think there's a way to
automatically
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 October 2010 20:19, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com wrote:
Anyway, integration with existing services would be very good, but I
doubt it will be possible. I don't think there's a way to
Dear Haskellers,
I've a question about type class design. When
developing the set of functions for a class, there
are often two or more functions, let's say f and g,
where the semantics of g can be expressed by f.
When writing down the code, there are two choices
for g. First g is included in
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Steve Severance st...@medwizard.net wrote:
whenever I here any open source community
(yeah...everyone not just haskell) tell beginners to contribute a
package I always scratch my head with a little bit of wonder. Would
you really want a package that someone
Hi,
Uwe Schmidt wrote:
In the standard Haskell classes we can find both cases,
even within a single class.
Eq with (==) as f and (/=) as g belongs to the 1. case
Note that the case of (==) and (/=) is slightly different, because not
only can (/=) be defined in terms (==), but also the other
On 29 October 2010 23:28, Uwe Schmidt u...@fh-wedel.de wrote:
Dear Haskellers,
I've a question about type class design. When
developing the set of functions for a class, there
are often two or more functions, let's say f and g,
where the semantics of g can be expressed by f.
When writing
Hi all,
I have a problem with the design of the Applicative type class, and
I'm interested to know people's opinion about this.
Currently, the Functor and Applicative type class are defined like this:
class Functor f where
fmap:: (a - b) - f a - f b
class Functor f =
Thank's. I didn't see the menu style on top of the page. It helps a lot.
I think it's just a matter of getting used with the new colors...
[]s
Victor
On Oct 28, 2010, at 11:51 PM, Antoine Latter wrote:
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Andrew Coppin
andrewcop...@btinternet.com wrote:
On
Hello the list,
I have another silly question.
In my software I have a very common pattern:
--in file A.hs
module A where
data A = A {b :: B, i :: Int}
type SA x = State A x
-- many functions with SA x
--in file B.hs
data B = B {r :: Int}
type SB x = State B x
-- many functions with SB x
On 29 October 2010 14:35, Dominique Devriese
dominique.devri...@cs.kuleuven.be wrote:
I have a problem with the design of the Applicative type class
Sorry for going a bit off-topic, but every-time I see someone complaining
about such things, I remember this proposal:
2010/10/29 Dupont Corentin corentin.dup...@gmail.com:
Of course in module A I'm calling some functions of module B.
I'd like to know if it's possible, in a function of type SA, to call a
function of type SB,
without actually executing the State SB.
I just wanna tell him Hey look, you can
Speaking of MagicHash, is it really necessary to take an operator with
potential like (#) just to keep primitive symbols separate from the rest?
At least from my 2010 Haskell learner perspective, it seems odd to create a
whole language extension/lexical change just for that purpose.
On Thu, Oct
I've been thinking about the following type class design principles:
* Only include two functions in the same design class if both can be
implemented in terms of each other.
* Only introduce a dependency from type class A to type class B if all
functions in type class B can be
2010/10/29 Dupont Corentin corentin.dup...@gmail.com:
Also, I can't manage to write the more generic function SB x - SA x.
Horribly enough this one seems to work...
mapOnBofA :: SB a - SA a
mapOnBofA mf = get = \st@(A {b=temp}) -
let (ans,temp2) = runState mf temp
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Tillmann Rendel
ren...@informatik.uni-marburg.de wrote:
Note that the case of (==) and (/=) is slightly different, because not only
can (/=) be defined in terms (==), but also the other way around. The
default definitions of (==) and (/=) are mutually
Horribly enough this one seems to work...
mapOnBofA :: SB a - SA a
mapOnBofA mf = get = \st@(A {b=temp}) -
let (ans,temp2) = runState mf temp
in put (st { b=temp2}) return ans
There is nothing horrible about that. You just run a new isolated
computation in
I have been thinking for a while that it might be worth defining a
Prelude2, which corrects the known problems with the Prelude. Over time,
people could migrate to using Prelude2. It would probably take years to be
widely adopted, but at least there would be light at the end of the
tunnel.
Thank you for your responses. I will look at monad transformers.
I already use them I think because actually I use something like StateT Game
IO a.
You mean I have to implement my own instance?
Oh, can you call me Corentin? This is my name ;)
Cheers,
Corentin
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 6:19 PM,
Nothing hinders you writing:
StateT Game (StateT A IO)
or
GameT mt = ErrorT Err (StateT Game (mt IO))
with mt being another Monad-Transformer
Monad-Transformers can be quite tricky. The point is you don't have to
create new Monad instances.
On 29 Okt., 18:46, Dupont Corentin
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Ben Millwood hask...@benmachine.co.uk wrote:
Besides, I'd think that often what Haskell developers lack is time
more than skill - there are plenty of tasks that could be done without
advanced knowledge of deep abstractions, if only someone could put
aside a few
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
IIUC, [one of] the prime motivating factor[s] behind both reddit and
StackOverflow is the accumulation of karma, which leads to people
posting just to try and accumulate karma even if they don't know what
In the lessons you say:
Haskell proved too slow with String Map, so we ended up interning strings
and working with an IntMap and a dictionary to disintern back to strings as
a last step. Daniel Fisher was instrumental in bringing Haskell up to speed
with OCaml and then beating it. Don
On 27 October 2010 13:30, Martijn Schrage mart...@oblomov.com wrote:
On 21-10-10 01:01, Victor Nazarov wrote:
This example creates a text field that turns red if it contains any
non-digit characters. It is on-line at
http://tryout.oblomov.com/ghcjs/ghcjs.html (Note: I only tested it on
dmehrtash:
In the lessons you say:
Haskell proved too slow with String Map, so we ended up interning strings
and working with an IntMap and a dictionary to disintern back to strings
as
a last step. Daniel Fisher was instrumental in bringing Haskell up to
speed with
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Tillmann Rendel
ren...@informatik.uni-marburg.de wrote:
Hi,
Uwe Schmidt wrote:
In the standard Haskell classes we can find both cases,
even within a single class.
Eq with (==) as f and (/=) as g belongs to the 1. case
Note that the case of (==) and (/=)
you can find a nice introduction on using monad transformers by
developing an interpreter at [1] and a little more detailed one at [2]
[1]http://www.grabmueller.de/martin/www/pub/Transformers.pdf
[2]http://www.haskell.org/all_about_monads/html/
On 29 Okt., 18:46, Dupont Corentin
On 30 October 2010 05:51, C. McCann c...@uptoisomorphism.net wrote:
Speaking of not wanting more places to keep track of, that's precisely
why I rarely bother with blog comments and would find discussions on
reddit preferable: it's a single place to go, and keeps things more
unified and
On Fri, 22 Oct 2010, Sigbjorn Finne wrote:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Sittampalam, Ganesh
ganesh.sittampa...@credit-suisse.com wrote:
libraries@, what's the right way to proceed? Can I make a Debian-style
non-maintainer upload with minimal changes to fix urgent issues like
these?
ivan.miljenovic:
Neither the Haskell reddit nor Stack Overflow are linked to from
haskell.org and there is nothing to indicate that they are official.
Also, wasn't it Don that started (and is mainly responsible) for
linking to Haskell articles on reddit?
They're linked from the front page.
On 30 October 2010 09:51, Don Stewart d...@galois.com wrote:
ivan.miljenovic:
Neither the Haskell reddit nor Stack Overflow are linked to from
haskell.org and there is nothing to indicate that they are official.
Also, wasn't it Don that started (and is mainly responsible) for
linking to
ivan.miljenovic:
On 30 October 2010 09:51, Don Stewart d...@galois.com wrote:
ivan.miljenovic:
Neither the Haskell reddit nor Stack Overflow are linked to from
haskell.org and there is nothing to indicate that they are official.
Also, wasn't it Don that started (and is mainly
On 10/29/10 2:33 AM, Gregory Crosswhite wrote:
Also, this is a complete aside but what the heck. :-)
Has anyone else been driven crazy by the way that Java code and
libraries are documented? It seems like whenever I try to figure out how
to use a piece of Java code, the functionality is spread
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
So you'd prefer to have the discussion about a blog post be made
distinct from the blog post itself? Why not keep them together, also
so that people finding the blog post from someplace other than reddit
On 10/29/10 11:18 AM, Daniel Peebles wrote:
Speaking of MagicHash, is it really necessary to take an operator with
potential like (#) just to keep primitive symbols separate from the rest?
At least from my 2010 Haskell learner perspective, it seems odd to create a
whole language
Honestly, I think a big part of this isn't documentation practices so much
as it is the expression problem. For a lot of the problems I tackle, the OO
model is not appropriate for capturing program structure. Pairing this with
Java's requirement of one class per file means that the actual
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:54 PM, wren ng thornton w...@freegeek.org wrote:
I'm sort of torn on this issue. On the one hand (#) has great potential as
an operator, on the other hand I've found that having something like
-XMagicHash (or TeX's \makeatletter and \makeatother) can be really helpful
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 4:42 PM, Ben Millwood hask...@benmachine.co.uk wrote:
Personally I think function composition is what Haskell is all about
and it is absolutely essential that the syntax for it be lightweight.
If we think using . as qualification as well as composition is
confusing, I'm
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 01:55:12PM -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
The number of subscribers to the Haskell Reddit, for example, is double
the -cafe@, and there are comparable numbers of questions being asked on
the Stack Overflow [haskell] tag, as here -- so anyone who only reads
-cafe@ is already
On 30 October 2010 12:22, Lauri Alanko l...@iki.fi wrote:
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 01:55:12PM -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
The number of subscribers to the Haskell Reddit, for example, is double
the -cafe@, and there are comparable numbers of questions being asked on
the Stack Overflow [haskell]
On 10/29/10 8:33 PM, C. McCann wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:54 PM, wren ng thorntonw...@freegeek.org wrote:
I'm sort of torn on this issue. On the one hand (#) has great potential as
an operator, on the other hand I've found that having something like
-XMagicHash (or TeX's \makeatletter
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:30 PM, wren ng thornton w...@freegeek.org wrote:
I suggest U+2621.
I'm not sure I'd've ever recognized a funny 'z' as caution sign... :)
Well, I'm operating under the assumption that it's one of these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourbaki_dangerous_bend_symbol
I
Hi,
Can somebody please explain exactly how the monad functions sequence and
sequence_ are meant to work?
I have almost every Haskell textbook, but there's surprisingly little
information in them about the two functions.
From what I can gather, sequence and sequence_ behave differently
On 2010-10-30 07:07, Mark Spezzano wrote:
Hi,
Can somebody please explain exactly how the monad functions sequence and
sequence_ are meant to work?
I have almost every Haskell textbook, but there's surprisingly little
information in them about the two functions.
From what I can gather,
The expression
sequence [a,b,c,...]
is roughly equivalent to
do
r_a - a
r_b - b
r_c - c
...
return [r_a,r_b,r_c,...]
The expression
sequence_ [a,b,c,...]
is roughly equivalent to
do
a
b
c
...
Not exactly. If you use the type with Maybe Int like so:
sequence [Just 1, Nothing, Just 2]
then the result is Nothing.
Whereas sequence [Just 1, Just 2, Just 3] gives
Just [1, 2, 3]
Why?
I assume there's special implementations of sequence and sequence_ depending on
the type of monad used.
On 30 October 2010 16:30, Mark Spezzano mark.spezz...@chariot.net.au wrote:
Not exactly. If you use the type with Maybe Int like so:
sequence [Just 1, Nothing, Just 2]
then the result is Nothing.
Whereas sequence [Just 1, Just 2, Just 3] gives
Just [1, 2, 3]
Why?
I assume there's
That is a result of the implementation of the specific Monad instance, and
that does depend on the type, as you say (but it isn't determined for
sequence(_) specifically).
Nothing = f = Nothing
Just x = f = f x
is why a Nothing pollutes the sequenced lists of Maybes. If Maybe is a
Monad
On Oct 30, 2010, at 2:30 PM, Mark Spezzano wrote:
If you use the type with Maybe Int like so:
sequence [Just 1, Nothing, Just 2]
then the result is Nothing.
Whereas sequence [Just 1, Just 2, Just 3] gives
Just [1, 2, 3]
Try
do x - Just 1
y - Nothing
z - Just 2
57 matches
Mail list logo
