* Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com [2011-11-17 21:09:15-0800]
Hi all,
I spent some time today documenting a library and the experience left me
wanting a better markup language. In particular, Haddock lacks:
* markup for bold text: bold text works better than italics for emphasis
on
* Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com [2011-11-17 21:21:47-0800]
Hi all,
Data.Map is getting split into Data.Map.Lazy and Data.Map.Strict (with
Data.Map re-exporting the lazy API). I want to better document the
strictness properties of the two new modules. Right now the
documentation for
On 18 November 2011 19:06, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info wrote:
Maybe have a switch that enables markdown and disables markup-related
features of haddock (everything except linking to identifiers/modules, I
believe), so that we don't affect existing docs. Then make it possible
to pass this
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
Wasn't there talk at one stage of integrating pandoc into haddock?
I wouldn't mind Haddock depending on Pandoc, at least optionally
(-fmarkdown-comments). Taking this to its conclusion you could easily
have syntax-highlighted code examples
Felipe Almeida Lessa felipe.le...@gmail.com writes:
It's funny how we, haskellers, find 'm' and 'b' descriptive names. I
know many programmers who would cry after seeing this =).
It takes a bit of practice to get used to, but then they really are
descriptive. The trick is to keep the number
John Meacham j...@repetae.net writes:
People tend to concentrate on the lambda which cooresponds to the
functional aspect of haskell when designing logos. Not nearly enough
attention is paid to the other striking feature, the
What about types? This is a distinguishing feature from many of
Hello,
While re-reading RealWorldHaskell, chapter 25, I saw that -- unlike I
believed -- loop fusion wasn't activated by default under GHC for lists
(but that module Data.List.Stream from package stream-fusion could provide
it).
Is that still the case? If not, then are there some cases of list
Johan Tibell wrote:
map (\ v - undefined) == undefined
mapKeys (\ k - undefined) == undefined
Not really related to the question but I don't really understand how these
properties can possibly hold. Shouldn't it be:
map (\v - undefined) x = undefined
And even then, does
Instead of rewriting modifySTRef, why not just do :
modifySTRef counter (\x - let y = x+1 in y `seq` y)
Is there a problem with that?
2011/11/16 Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Jason Dusek jason.du...@gmail.comwrote:
diff --git a/Rebuild.hs
On 18 November 2011 06:44, Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com wrote:
Here are some examples:
insertWith (+) k undefined m == undefined
delete undefined m == undefined
map (\ v - undefined) == undefined
mapKeys (\ k - undefined) == undefined
Any ideas for further
On Friday 18 November 2011, 11:18:33, Yves Parès wrote:
Instead of rewriting modifySTRef, why not just do :
modifySTRef counter (\x - let y = x+1 in y `seq` y)
Is there a problem with that?
Yes, y `seq` y is precisely the same as y.
a `seq` b means whenever evaluation of b is demanded,
Okay, thanks
I was pretty sure I was wrong (or else somebody would already have come up
with that solution), but I wanted to know why.
2011/11/18 Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@googlemail.com
On Friday 18 November 2011, 11:18:33, Yves Parès wrote:
Instead of rewriting modifySTRef, why not
(Sorry for the double mail)
...so there is no way to do that inside the function passed to modifySTRef?
In other words, there is no way to ensure *inside* a function that its
result will be evaluated strictly?
2011/11/18 Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@googlemail.com
On Friday 18 November
Apart from the whole big discussion about an official mascot for
Haskell, I for one am SURELY adopting Da, the Lamb from now on on my
desktop background and on the lid of my laptop! :D
I think some cute animal to connect with is something nice to us, as a
community :) Could you imagine Linux
On 18/11/11 06:44, Johan Tibell wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Johan Tibelljohan.tib...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not entirely happy with this formulation. I'm looking for
something that's clear (i.e. precise and concise, without leaving out
important information), assuming that the reader
On Friday 18 November 2011, 13:05:06, Yves Parès wrote:
...so there is no way to do that inside the function passed to
modifySTRef? In other words, there is no way to ensure inside a
function that its result will be evaluated strictly?
Well,
modifySTRef ref fun = do
val - readSTRef ref
On 18/11/11 09:18, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
On 18 November 2011 19:06, Roman Cheplyakar...@ro-che.info wrote:
Maybe have a switch that enables markdown and disables markup-related
features of haddock (everything except linking to identifiers/modules, I
believe), so that we don't affect
On 18 November 2011 13:17, Daniel Fischer
daniel.is.fisc...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Friday 18 November 2011, 13:05:06, Yves Parès wrote:
...so there is no way to do that inside the function passed to
modifySTRef? In other words, there is no way to ensure inside a
function that its result will
Yves Parès wrote:
While re-reading RealWorldHaskell, chapter 25, I saw that -- unlike I
believed -- loop fusion wasn't activated by default under GHC for lists
(but that module Data.List.Stream from package stream-fusion could provide
it).
Note that stream fusion is only one way to do
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info wrote:
Is it mentioned anywhere that Map is spine-strict?
It's not and we should probably mention it.
I was mulling this over last night. My initial thought was that it
shouldn't matter as long as the algorithmic complexity of
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Roman Leshchinskiy r...@cse.unsw.edu.au
wrote:
Johan Tibell wrote:
map (\ v - undefined) == undefined
mapKeys (\ k - undefined) == undefined
Not really related to the question but I don't really understand how these
properties can possibly
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 5:02 AM, Twan van Laarhoven twa...@gmail.com wrote:
* key and value function arguments passed to functions are
evaluated to WHNF before the function body is evaluated, and
function arguments passed to functions sounds a bit redundant. Either say
arguments passed to
Here's an attempt at an improved version:
Strictness properties
=
This module satisfies the following properties:
1. Key and value arguments are evaluated to WHNF;
2. Keys and values are evaluated to WHNF before they are stored in
the map.
Here are some examples that
Howdy Haskeller,
I've launch a new, Haskell powered, adventure: Visi.Pro, Cloud Computing for
the Rest of Us. Visi.Pro will offer a HyperCard-like development environment
that will empower normal people to build and run beautiful, interactive apps on
their iPad and seamlessly integrate the
* Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com [2011-11-18 08:06:29-0800]
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info wrote:
Is it mentioned anywhere that Map is spine-strict?
It's not and we should probably mention it.
Hm. Perhaps I'm missing something, but
data Map k a =
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:16, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info wrote:
* Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com [2011-11-18 08:06:29-0800]
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info
wrote:
Is it mentioned anywhere that Map is spine-strict?
It's not and we should
* Brandon Allbery allber...@gmail.com [2011-11-18 12:20:33-0500]
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:16, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info wrote:
* Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com [2011-11-18 08:06:29-0800]
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info
wrote:
Is it
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info wrote:
* Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com [2011-11-18 08:06:29-0800]
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info wrote:
Is it mentioned anywhere that Map is spine-strict?
It's not and we should
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 06:58:41 +0100, Evan Laforge qdun...@gmail.com wrote:
Any ideas for further improvements?
I feel like there should be a canonical what is WHNF page on
haskell.org that docs like this can link to. Namely, what it is
theoretically, what that means for various examples of
29 matches
Mail list logo
