sounds good. will there be a shadowing warning?
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Lennart Augustsson
lenn...@augustsson.net wrote:
It's not often that one gets the chance to change something as
fundamental as the scoping rules of a language. Nevertheless, I would
like to propose a change to
I am starting up the proposal.
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/ticket/143
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/OpaqueText
Unfortunately I haven't had any time to work on this for the last week
and won't for 2 more weeks.
Your help is appreciated. I think the first
are here to stay in Haskell.
I would like to get back to working on the proposal and determining
how Text can be added to the language.
Thank you,
Greg weber
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo
I would like to get back to working on the proposal and determining
how Text can be added to the language.
The discussion started because of the question of whether Text should
support list processing functions at all, and if so how. That is a
very legitimate
question related to the Text
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
g...@integrable-solutions.net wrote:
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Henrik Nilsson n...@cs.nott.ac.uk wrote:
In any case, this is hardly the place to to discuss how to best
teach Haskell or programming in general.
Sure, I haven't seen any
Can we all agree that
* Text can now demonstrate both CPU and RAM performance improvements
in benchmarks. Because Text is an opaque type it has a maximum
potential for future performance improvements. Declaring a String to
be a list limits performance improvements
* In a Unicode world, String =
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
g...@integrable-solutions.net wrote:
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 9:09 PM, Greg Weber g...@gregweber.info wrote:
Problem: we want to write beautiful (and possibly inefficient) code
that is easy to explain. If nothing else, this is pedagologically
David
arjanen.l...@gmail.com wrote:
2012/3/22 Greg Weber g...@gregweber.info:
I am not trying to win an argument with anyone. Just trying to do what
is best for the community. Many others here have a better grasp of the
issue than me and can help answer questions and come up with a
solution.
I
comparisons to
Perl 6 is not going to help move the discussion along!
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Christian Siefkes
christ...@siefkes.net wrote:
On 03/23/2012 02:13 PM, ARJANEN Loïc Jean David wrote:
2012/3/22 Greg Weber g...@gregweber.info:
But now we have at least two tasks to do before we can put
This proposal seems fairly uncontroversial at the moment. I would
really like it if someone more familiar with the proposal process can
take this proposal up and help make sure it gets in the next batch. I
can't even figure out how to create a wiki page for the proposal right
now :)
I actually was not able to successfully google for Text vs. String
benchmarks. If someone can point one out that would be very helpful.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Christopher Done
chrisd...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 17 March 2012 05:30, Tony Morris tonymor...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you know
This is the best I can do with Bryan's blog posts, but none of the
graphs (which contain all the information) show up:
http://web.archive.org/web/20100222031602/http://www.serpentine.com/blog/2009/12/10/the-performance-of-data-text/
If someone has some benchmarks that can be ran that would be
the text library and Text data type have shown the worth in real world
Haskell usage with GHC.
I try to avoid String whenever possible, but I still have to deal with
conversions and other issues.
There is a lot of real work to be done to convert away from [Char],
but I think we need to take it out
on the one at hand.
Thank you!
Greg Weber
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Roman Leshchinskiy r...@cse.unsw.edu.au
wrote:
On 12/02/2012, at 01:29, Nate Soares wrote:
If - was introduced for accessing fields, we'd have to discuss whether it
should have spaces around it. I'd lean towards
Similar to proposal #20, which wants to remove it, but immediately
less drastic, even though the long-term goal is the same.
This helps clear the way for the usage of the unspaced dot as a record
field selector as shown in proposal #129.
After this proposal shows clear signs of moving forward I
and just have it mean category/lens
composition.
Thanks,
Dan
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Greg Weber g...@gregweber.info wrote:
Similar to proposal #20, which wants to remove it, but immediately
less drastic, even though the long-term goal is the same.
This helps clear the way
16 matches
Mail list logo
