On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 5:06 AM, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 2:01 PM, TP paratribulati...@free.fr wrote:
Hello,
My primary problem may be reduced to adding elements of two lists:
[1,2,3] + [4,5,6] = [5,7,9]
My first idea was to declare a list of Int as
Hi I have met a piece of code that cannot be compiled whether I add or remove
the NoMonomorphismRestriction flag (as of GHC 7.0.4, Haskell platform
2011.4.0.0).I have extracted a minimal example below: {-# LANGUAGE
NoMonomorphismRestriction #-}
(f1, f2) =
let commond_definitions =
Richard O'Keefe o...@cs.otago.ac.nz writes:
newtype PS a = PS [a] deriving (Eq, Show)
u f (PS x)= PS $ map f x
b f (PS x) (PS y) = PS $ zipWith f x y
to_ps x = PS (x : repeat 0)
BTW, isn't this a good candidate for an Applicative instance (similar to
ZipList)?
u f p
Alberto G. Corona wrote about a monad to set a checkpoint and be able
to repeatedly go to that checkpoint and re-execute the computations
following the checkpoint.
http://haskell-web.blogspot.com.es/2012/03/failback-monad.html
The typical example is as follows.
test= runBackT $ do
Florian Hartwig wrote:
Hi everyone,
I would like to do the GSoC project outlined in
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/summer-of-code/ticket/1608
One of Haskell's great strengths is its support for all kinds of concurrent
and parallel programmming, so I think that the Haskell ecosystem would
Though of course you can implement CAS in terms of STM, CAS is much
more low-level and will probably be many times (though not
asymptotically) faster.
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Heinrich Apfelmus
apfel...@quantentunnel.de wrote:
Florian Hartwig wrote:
Hi everyone,
I would like to do
Ting Lei tin...@hotmail.com writes:
(f1, f2) =
let commond_definitions = undefined in
let f1 = id.show
f2 x = ( x)
in
(f1, f2)
I think the type signatures should be:
f1 :: Show a = a - String
and
f2 :: Ord b = b - b - Bool
When I define these
On 29 March 2012 05:57, Ryan Newton rrnew...@gmail.com wrote:
I just read in your proposal that you started looking into the casMutArray#
issue as well. How far have you gotten with that? Do you want to work on
this together a bit?
I've got an implementation of a casArray# primop that
On 29 March 2012 at 12:01 PM, Heinrich Apfelmus
apfelmus at quantentunnel.de wrote:
Since I don't know much about concurrency, I have a simple question: what is
the difference between atomic compare-and-swap and software transactional
memory? Both are lock-free?
Well, terminology-wise it would
Ketil Malde wrote:
Ting Lei tin...@hotmail.com writes:
(f1, f2) =
let commond_definitions = undefined in
let f1 = id.show
f2 x = ( x)
in
(f1, f2)
I think the type signatures should be:
f1 :: Show a = a - String
and
f2 :: Ord b = b - b - Bool
When I
Florian Hartwig wrote:
Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
So while the two are related, CAS is a machine primitive that works
for a single operation and on a single word while STM is a software
abstraction that isolates sequences of operations on multiple memory
locations from each other.
Is it
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Ryan Newton rrnew...@gmail.com wrote:
The ByteArray versions will be more annoying, requiring more variations,
but they are also less essential, because the user can always use
ForeignPtr and bits-atomic in this case, and I believe for our concurrent
data
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Gregory Collins g...@gregorycollins.netwrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Ryan Newton rrnew...@gmail.com wrote:
The ByteArray versions will be more annoying, requiring more variations,
but they are also less essential, because the user can always use
I think so. Atomically reading and writing a single memory location
(which CAS does) is just a very simple transaction. But using a CAS
instruction should be more efficient, since STM has to maintain a
transaction log and commit transactions, which creates some overhead.
Ah, I see. In that
Hi,
Somewhat related to this...
Next month we have a paper coming up at EuroSys about a middle-ground between
using STM and programming directly with CAS:
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/tharris/papers/2012-eurosys.pdf
This was done in the context of shared memory data
From: Richard O'Keefe o...@cs.otago.ac.nz
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:34:46 +1300
On 29/03/2012, at 3:08 PM, Doug McIlroy wrote:
- without newtype
toSeries f = f : repeat 0 -- coerce scalar to series
instance Num a = Num [a] where
(f:fs) + (g:gs) = f+g : fs+gs
I think the error message tell you how to fix:
use -XNoMonomorphismRestriction
One approach is add following line into top of your hs file and it works for me.
{-# LANGUAGE NoMonomorphismRestriction #-}
Regarding the deeper reason, I think you would be able to find via GHC
user guide and
Ketil, Thanks for the response. It seems that defining them as a pair only
postphones the error.GHC will give an error when you extract the components of
the pair, no matter whether you addthe NoMonomorphismRestriction flag or not.
--{-# LANGUAGE NoMonomorphismRestriction #-}p :: (Show a, Ord
Hi,
I've been trying to get my head around Functional Reactive Programming
by writing a basic explanation of it, following the logic that
explaining something is the best way to understand it.
Am I on the right track with this explanation?
Greetings,
Peter Minten
P.S. Sorry about the long
Hey All,
Theres actually a number of issues the come up with an effective dataframe-like
for haskell, and data vis as well. (both of which I have some strong personal
opinions on for haskell and which I'm exploring / experimenting with this
spring). While folks have touched on a bunch, I just
On 29 March 2012 04:34, Richard O'Keefe o...@cs.otago.ac.nz wrote:
u f (PS x)= PS $ map f x
b f (PS x) (PS y) = PS $ zipWith f x y
to_ps x = PS (x : repeat 0)
Also see: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/newtype
--
Ozgur Akgun
We are pleased to announce the release of Happstack 7!
Happstack is a fast, modern, web application framework written in Haskell.
Please check out the brand new happstack.com website to read about what is
new in Happstack 7, and what we are planning for Happstack 8, and what
makes Happstack
Some more bikeshedding:
Perhaps ffor, as in
ffor = flip fmap
or perhaps
infixr 0 $$
($$) = flip ($)
xs $$ \x - ...
(cf. **)
In both cases they should go in Data.Functor
Sjoerd
On Mar 28, 2012, at 11:26 PM, e...@ezrakilty.net wrote:
I would very much like to see a
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 22:42:58 +0200, Doug McIlroy d...@cs.dartmouth.edu
wrote:
On windows I have long used hugs under cygwin, but hugs
doesn't get along well with cygwin's latest terminal
emulator. So I switched to winhugs. Small problem
that looms big: how do you interrupt an interminable
On 29 March 2012 22:03, Sjoerd Visscher sjo...@w3future.com wrote:
Some more bikeshedding:
Perhaps ffor, as in
ffor = flip fmap
or perhaps
infixr 0 $$
($$) = flip ($)
xs $$ \x - ...
I don't think it makes sense to add a whole new operator for that.
You can just use
Slightly related: I think it would be interesting to compare a
Disruptor-based concurrency communications mechanism and compare it to
e.g. TChans
1. Disruptor - http://code.google.com/p/disruptor/
From: Ryan Newton rrnew...@gmail.com
I think so. Atomically reading and writing a single memory
Peter Minten peter.min...@orange.nl wrote:
I've been trying to get my head around Functional Reactive Programming
by writing a basic explanation of it, following the logic that
explaining something is the best way to understand it.
Am I on the right track with this explanation?
You are
Hi all,
I am new at Haskell, but I am trying to learn as much as possible.
While learning, I noticed that h-99 (the 99 Haskell problems) are highly
recommended on haskell.org. However, the answers to the 99 problems are not
finished, and some of the answers are not really Haskell-ish.
So here's
28 matches
Mail list logo
