At 03:27 30-01-02 -0800, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
>| hbc is on the Integral side, if that counts. :-)
>| Just because ghc doesn't follow the spec isn't a good reason
>| to change the spec. :-)
>
>I absolutely didn't say that! All I'm saying is
>
>* Two of the four impls have to change regardless
carlos wrote:
Hello.
I'm having
some trouble trying to understand exactly what's behind the rule for
pattern-matching with data constructors. The code I'm having trouble with
is similar to this:
f (C p1 p2 (C2 p3 p4)) = ...
f _ = False
What happens is if f is called with (C p1 p2 (N
Ashley Yakeley wrote:
>I'd like to be able to declare the kinds of new types and synonyms,
>because sometimes Haskell can't infer them. For instance:
>
> data CMap0 p q = MkCMap0;
>
>Without evidence, Haskell assumes that p and q have kind '*' (as per sec.
>4.6), and therefore CMap0 has kind '
Dear reader,
I'm pleased to announce the availability of a release of the Haskell module
for JCreator. You can get it, as usual, at
http://www.students.cs.uu.nl/people/rjchaaft/JCreator
The previous update lacks the documentation tool, and is quite restrictive
concerning the location of Hugs,
Hello,
Bernard wrote:
<>
>But the problem is not solved (drum roll please). Even first time programmers
>know the pitfalls of trying to show the empty list:
>
>show [] ---> kapow!
>
>But you ought to be able to print the empty list,
>without having to make some bogus type qualification (which
Hello,
Recently, I wrote a function similar to
x :: a
x = x 42
which is type-correct (Hugs, Ghc, THIH).
Still, from the expression it is clear
that the type shoud have a function type.
The definition
x :: a -> b
x = x 42
is equally well accepted, though I can't
see why this type would be corr
Hello,
Recently, I wrote a function similar to
x :: a
x = x 42
which is type-correct (Hugs, Ghc, THIH).
Still, from the expression it is clear
that the type shoud have a function type.
The definition
x :: a -> b
x = x 42
is equally well accepted, though I can't
see why this type would be corr
Hello everybody,
Although I didn't manage to reproduce the
bug with a minimal example, I think it is
still important enough to tell you (and
especially the Hugs writers and maintainers).
Yesterday evening, I tried to add some correct
(!) code (by-hand-verifyable; by GHC accepted;
just using plai
Dear all,
After intensive investication of several people here at
Utrecht University, these are the results
1. The very latest Hugs version doesn't have the bug
2. All before-december-2001 versions don't have the bug
I were using a version downloaded some weeks ago. After
installing the curr
Dear all,
After intensive investication of several people
at Utrecht University, these are the results:
1. The very latest Hugs version doesn't have the bug
2. All before-december-2001 versions don't have the bug
I were using a version downloaded some weeks ago.
After installing the current dist
Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
>>-
>>1) Are e1 and e2 equal?
>>
>> > f (x:xs) y = x
>> > g (x:xs)= \y -> x
>> >
>> > e1 = seq (f []) 1
>> > e2 = seq (g []) 1
>
>Should not these be
>
>f (x:xs) y = y
>g (x:xs)= \y -> y
>?
>Otherwise, both e1 and e
>but in windows 2000
>
>Then suddnly interpreter fails and
>the red (X) popup window pops up.
>
>hugs.exe - application programm error
>
> unknown software exception (0xc000fd) ... blabla
Are you sure you have the very very very latest download?
There have been some undocumented updates of t
Ahn Ki-yung wrote:
>Prelude> f 1 where f x = x : f x
>[1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
>,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
>,1,1,{Interrupted!}
>
>Prelude> f 1 where f x = x + f x
--> Immediate (!) crash
Indeed, I could reproduce this on my
Hello all,
Peter Achten and Arjan van IJzendoorn wrote:
>I <...> unfortunately could not open the .zip files
and Peter asked
>Could you check the formats of these files?
After having tried to download the file a few times, I believe
the problem is not in the zip file format, but download failur
>The quick reference still gives problems.
I managed to download the quick reference.
Get it at
http://www.students.cs.uu.nl/people/rjchaaft/ObjectIO/objectio-ref.zip
This is a very temporarily available service,
so if anyone has a suitable server (again, cvs.haskell.org?),
please take over hos
Hello everybody,
Every now and then I hear people complain
that writing expressions like in the subject line
is impossible, though desirable in some cases.
Today, I ran into a situation where I really needed
that feature, because I were working with a code
generator (UU_AG) that allows just infi
>module InfixFunction where
>
>-- This is a flipped $
>infixl 0 $-
>($-) :: a -> (a -> b) -> b
>($-) x f = f x
>
>example1 :: Int
>example1 =
>-- 3`\x y -> x + y` 4
> 3 $- (\y x -> x + y) 4
>
>example2 :: Int
>example2 =
>-- 1`\x y -> x + y` 2`\x y -> x` 3
> 1
I pasted the wrong version into the mail.
This is the final one:
module InfixFunction where
infixl 0 $-
infixr 0 $+
-- for left-associative functions
($<) :: a -> (a -> b) -> b
($<) x f = f x
-- for right-associative functions
($>) :: a -> (a -> b) -> b
($>) x f = f x
example1 :: Int
example1
18 matches
Mail list logo
