On Feb 27, 2006, at 3:31 PM, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
I'd advise against using implicit parameters, because (as you've
seen) it's hard to reason about when they'll get passed to functions.
And Johannes Waldmann wrote:
Implicit parameters are *evil*. They seem to
On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 09:26:08AM -0800, John Velman wrote:
In a recent message to this list (msg15410) Oleg referenced a paper
comparing implicit parameters and implicit configurations with url
http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~ccshan/prepose/prepose.pdf . I'd like to read
this, (and examine the
Thanks to everyone who answered! I now have a copy.
Best to all,
John Velman
___
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
hi,
i don't think this is a bug, and this is a situation where it matters
if you use ($) or parens. the same probelm occurs when you work
with polymorohism, rank-2 and above, e.g. when you use runST.
the problem occurs because ($) has a monomorphic (non-overloaded)
type:
($) :: (a - b) - (a - b)
Here's an example of implicit return values from a project I worked on
recently, followed by an example of the thread idea.
Suppose I've written a decompiler -- it takes binary object code and
produces an abstract syntax tree representing source code. A very
simplified version of the output type
Ben,
Could you explain in an extremely dumbed-down way what this is? It would
be great if there were examples of
1) Some common, simple, and useful code in Haskell.
2) Same code using Implicit Parameters with a discussion of how it is
better.
Thanks,
David J. Sankel
