Rijk-Jan van Haaften = Hannah Schroeter:
... However, not using the Monadic do syntax results in
hardly-readible code.
I don't really think so. The operator precedences for and = are
quite okay, especially combined to the precedence of lambda binding.
...
main = do
putStr
John,
On Thu, 17 May 2001, John Meacham wrote:
[..]
namely that you don't necisarilly know all of the types of polymorphic
functions when they are in a module that is compiled seperately from the
rest of the program. the solution used by many C++ compilers is to
inline all polymorphic code
Josef Svenningsson wrote:
John,
On Thu, 17 May 2001, John Meacham wrote:
[..]
namely that you don't necisarilly know all of the types of polymorphic
functions when they are in a module that is compiled seperately from the
rest of the program. the solution used by many C++ compilers is
Maestri, Primaballerine,
I have a really provocative question.
One of my student posed it, and I could not respond in a satisfactory
manner, especially for myself it was really unsatisfactory.
We know that a good part of top-down polymorphism (don't ask me what
do I mean by that...) in C++ is
Perhaps this monads discussion might move to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
It's a good discussion, but it's just what haskell-cafe is for.
http://www.haskell.org/mailinglist.html
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: Arthur H. Gold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: 17 May 2001 22:21
| To:
(This response comes from the context of someone who like FP but has a day
job writing in C++.)
On Fri, 18 May 2001, Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote:
We know that a good part of top-down polymorphism (don't ask me what
do I mean by that...) in C++ is emulated using templates.
Umm... what do you
Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
Hello,
I was trying to write an abstraction for bidirectional communication
between two threads. For some reason, MVars seem to break:
---
class Cords c t u where
newCord :: IO (c t u)
listen :: c t u - IO t
On Fri, 18 May 2001, Dean Herington wrote:
You are creating a new MVar with each listen and speak. As a result, the
two threads never agree on an MVar, so deadlock occurs. Instead, you should
create the pair of MVars in newCord. Try the code below.
[...]
Thanks, this works. Thanks!
The MLj compiler from ML to the Java Virtual Machine (which is being
actively worked on by the geniuses at Microsoft as we speak) expands
out all polymorphism. I helped develop this compiler and I believe
this approach to be a good one. There are particular reasons why it's
good for this
On Fri, 18 May 2001, Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote:
We know that a good part of top-down polymorphism (don't ask me what
do I mean by that...) in C++ is emulated using templates.
Always when somebody mentions templates in presence of a True Functionalist
Sectarian, the reaction is What!?
On 2001-05-18T08:56:57+0200, Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote:
The examples are already in the Wadler's Essence. Imagine the
construction of a small interpreter, a virtual machine which not only
evaluates the expressions (belonging to a trivial Monad), but perform
some side effects, or provides for
Fri, 18 May 2001 11:25:14 +0200, Jerzy Karczmarczuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Always when somebody mentions templates in presence of a True
Functionalist Sectarian, the reaction is What!? Abomination!!.
They aren't that wrong, but they have some problems:
* It's not specified what interface
this is interesting, could someone give an example of how polymorphic
recursion would disallow specialization of a function?
i mean, it seems to me that even if you had recursion, you still have to
actually call the function at some point with some real type and at that
point you can decide
On Fri, 18 May 2001, George Russell wrote:
The minus points are thuswise, so far as I know:
(1) the compiled code is bigger. (...)
(2) It takes much longer to compile. (...)
As it is very aggressive optimization,
I strongly suggest explicit(non-default) compiler switch
Greetings :-)
Fri, 18 May 2001 12:32:11 -0700, John Meacham [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
this is interesting, could someone give an example of how polymorphic
recursion would disallow specialization of a function?
test:: Show a = a - [String]
test x = show x : test [x]
--
__( Marcin Kowalczyk * [EMAIL
Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm currently re-implementing GHC's I/O library, and I'd like to get
people's opinions on the following I/O extensions currently provided by
GHC - should we continue to provide them or not.
1. IOExts.hConnectTo
This was designed to be a way to
16 matches
Mail list logo
