Title: InternetSeer Web Site Notification
SUBJECT: Broken link on cvs.haskell.org
There appears to be a problem on this page: http://cvs.haskell.org/Hugs/pages/downloading.htm
When you click on your link to:
Can't we make a mailing list for these issues?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is my proposal, who can create such a list?
I'll set up the list. Anyone wish to volunteer to moderate it?
Simon
___
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Title: Congratulations. Your Web Site is Registered
Dear InternetSeer,
Starting today, your site's connectivity will be tested every hour, seven days
a week. You will begin to receive the following benefits from InternetSeer:
A weekly performance report on your
tis 2002-08-13 klockan 11.57 skrev Simon Marlow:
Can't we make a mailing list for these issues?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is my proposal, who can create such a list?
I'll set up the list. Anyone wish to volunteer to moderate it?
Does it have to be moderated? This will make things progress
tis 2002-08-13 klockan 11.57 skrev Simon Marlow:
Can't we make a mailing list for these issues?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is my proposal, who can create
such a list?
I'll set up the list. Anyone wish to volunteer to moderate it?
Does it have to be moderated? This will make things
I can't seem to figure out what the difference is between using
evaluate (runST action)
and
stToIO action
when in the IO monad and running something in ST...they seem to behave
identically...are they?
If they are, why do they have different type signatures (one is ST
Hi all...I'd read through the results of the survey and there seemed to be
a sentiment that people tend to build their own in-house utilities and
don't share them. I have a small one, but if anyone wants to use it,
they're of course welcome. I have made it available at:
At 2002-08-09 03:26, Simon Marlow wrote:
Why combine I/O and {en,de}coding? Firstly, efficiency.
Hmm... surely the encoding functions can be defined efficiently?
decodeISO88591 :: [Word8] - [Char];
encodeISO88591 :: [Char] - [Word8]; -- uses low octet of
codepoint
You
OTOH, if you want to do anything useful with any language you have to learn
to do IO (and simple IO is tackled early in most languages), and therefore
you must deal with Monads. I often wish that Haskell books and tutorials
would introduce IO earlier; it is often near the end, in the advanced
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've come up with three different methods of approach to solve the same
problem in haskell. I would like to compare the three in terms of reductions,
memory usage, and overall big O complexity.
What's the quickest way to gather these stats? I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 13 August 2002 01:37 pm, you wrote:
I would like to compare the three in terms of reductions, memory
usage, and overall big O complexity.
I wouldn't use number of reductions as a guide if I was you.
Number of reductions does make a
G'day all.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 10:06:51PM +0100, Alistair Bayley wrote:
OTOH, if you want to do anything useful with any language you have to learn
to do IO (and simple IO is tackled early in most languages), and therefore
you must deal with Monads. I often wish that Haskell books and
G'day all.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 04:19:38AM -0700, John Meacham wrote:
grr. this used to be in a FAQ at the Wiki. whatever happened to that?
Unfortunately, the ReportingProblems page is one of the ones which
died. It's also not in the google cache.
Does anyone know who's responsible for
Hi all. Too many people on vacation is the real problem with the
wiki. Should be back in operation soon.
John
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
At 2002-08-13 04:13, Simon Marlow wrote:
That depends what you mean by efficient: these functions represent an
extra layer of intermediate list between the handle buffer and the final
[Char], and furthermore they don't work with partial reads - the input
has to be a lazy stream gotten from
15 matches
Mail list logo
