Send Beginners mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beginners
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Beginners digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax? (Olumide)
2. Re: Need help groking the statement: expression1 in
term:expression2 (Sumit Sahrawat, Maths & Computing, IIT (BHU))
3. Re: Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax?
(Martin Vlk)
4. Re: Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax?
(Sumit Sahrawat, Maths & Computing, IIT (BHU))
5. Re: Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax? (Olumide)
6. Re: Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax?
(Sumit Sahrawat, Maths & Computing, IIT (BHU))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 11:36:53 +0000
From: Olumide <[email protected]>
To: The Haskell-Beginners Mailing List - Discussion of primarily
beginner-level topics related to Haskell <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] Do IO actions *have* to be glued by
the do syntax?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Quanyang,
do bocks are *not* sugar, and please refer to Daniel's answer for an
example of how to answer a beginner's question.
- Olumide
On 22/03/2016 11:06, Quanyang Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22 2016 at 18:52:41 +0800, Olumide wrote:
>> Hello List,
>>
>> Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax? Many, if not all,
>> the examples that I've come across in LYH seem to suggest so. And if
>> so, why?
>>
>> BTW, if possible I'd appreciate an explanation that does not resort to
>> monads. I haven't studied them yet and I'm sure I'd struggle to
>> understand any explanation that resorts to monads.
>>
>
> I think you should google that first... do blocks are just sugar...
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> - Olumide
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 17:08:10 +0530
From: "Sumit Sahrawat, Maths & Computing, IIT (BHU)"
<[email protected]>
To: The Haskell-Beginners Mailing List - Discussion of primarily
beginner-level topics related to Haskell <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] Need help groking the statement:
expression1 in term:expression2
Message-ID:
<cajbew8oe1sfmzymsp5oed2mv4x40dmcv1p4y4_vlcqkhtms...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On 22-Mar-2016 4:14 pm, "Olumide" <[email protected]> wrote:
> randoms' :: (RandomGen g, Random a) => g -> [a]
> randoms' gen = let (value, newGen) = random gen in value:randoms' newGen
"random gen" returns a pair, whose first element is a random value, and the
second element is a new generator.
The cons (:) operator takes two values, one is an element, and the other is
a list. It returns a new list with the provided arguments as head and tail.
Ultimately, randoms' gen returns a list whose first element is a random
value, and the rest of the list is the result of calling randoms' on the
newly produced generator. Recursively, it generates an infinite lazy list
of random elements.
Hope this helps :)
Regards,
Sumit
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/attachments/20160322/24c73eb6/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 12:41:02 +0100
From: Martin Vlk <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] Do IO actions *have* to be glued by
the do syntax?
Message-ID:
<1458646862.2849307.556282290.2ae66...@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi Olumide,
Yes, do blocks are syntactic sugar.
Yes you are right in that answers here should be .. a bit friendlier.
But also in my opinion your last post is a bit.. arrogant sounding...
M.
Dne ?t, 22. b?ezen 2016 v 12:36 h u?ivatel Olumide napsal:
> Quanyang,
>
> do bocks are *not* sugar, and please refer to Daniel's answer for an
> example of how to answer a beginner's question.
>
> - Olumide
>
> On 22/03/2016 11:06, Quanyang Liu wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 22 2016 at 18:52:41 +0800, Olumide wrote:
> >> Hello List,
> >>
> >> Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax? Many, if not all,
> >> the examples that I've come across in LYH seem to suggest so. And if
> >> so, why?
> >>
> >> BTW, if possible I'd appreciate an explanation that does not resort to
> >> monads. I haven't studied them yet and I'm sure I'd struggle to
> >> understand any explanation that resorts to monads.
> >>
> >
> > I think you should google that first... do blocks are just sugar...
> >
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> - Olumide
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Beginners mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beginners
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 17:16:40 +0530
From: "Sumit Sahrawat, Maths & Computing, IIT (BHU)"
<[email protected]>
To: The Haskell-Beginners Mailing List - Discussion of primarily
beginner-level topics related to Haskell <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] Do IO actions *have* to be glued by
the do syntax?
Message-ID:
<cajbew8mcbebdfy+occq0wz1yu_mfbym2c8773rredxzb1rf...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Olumide, do blocks are indeed syntactic sugar. They are a piece of syntax
that converts to a specific type of expressions, namely those using the
bind (>>=) operator.
It is really helpful, when learning to be able to come up with answers in
your own. Learning Haskell has always involved combining many different
perspectives on the same topic, told differently in different places. It
would only help you if you took the time and dug further for answers. It's
really satisfying too!
Also, if you haven't, search for the Leavenworth guide. It takes this very
question in one of the miscellaneous discussions.
Be nice, be respectful. Have fun learning Haskell :)
On 22-Mar-2016 5:07 pm, "Olumide" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Quanyang,
>
> do bocks are *not* sugar, and please refer to Daniel's answer for an
> example of how to answer a beginner's question.
>
> - Olumide
>
> On 22/03/2016 11:06, Quanyang Liu wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 22 2016 at 18:52:41 +0800, Olumide wrote:
>>
>>> Hello List,
>>>
>>> Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax? Many, if not all,
>>> the examples that I've come across in LYH seem to suggest so. And if
>>> so, why?
>>>
>>> BTW, if possible I'd appreciate an explanation that does not resort to
>>> monads. I haven't studied them yet and I'm sure I'd struggle to
>>> understand any explanation that resorts to monads.
>>>
>>>
>> I think you should google that first... do blocks are just sugar...
>>
>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> - Olumide
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Beginners mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/attachments/20160322/74e6fcb8/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 11:46:00 +0000
From: Olumide <[email protected]>
To: The Haskell-Beginners Mailing List - Discussion of primarily
beginner-level topics related to Haskell <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] Do IO actions *have* to be glued by
the do syntax?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Can I also add that this sort of elitist, unhelpful quip of a
pseudo-answer is the reason that I've largely avoided asking Haskell
beginner questions on stackoverflow.
Haskell is a wonderful language with a steep learning curve and I
believe that it is the intention of this group grow the user base of the
language by create a place where beginners will not be afraid to ask
questions. And hasty ill-thought, poorly worded answers like Quanyang's
won't help the language get there sooner.
- Olumide
On 22/03/2016 11:36, Olumide wrote:
> Quanyang,
>
> do bocks are *not* sugar, and please refer to Daniel's answer for an
> example of how to answer a beginner's question.
>
> - Olumide
>
> On 22/03/2016 11:06, Quanyang Liu wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 22 2016 at 18:52:41 +0800, Olumide wrote:
>>> Hello List,
>>>
>>> Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax? Many, if not all,
>>> the examples that I've come across in LYH seem to suggest so. And if
>>> so, why?
>>>
>>> BTW, if possible I'd appreciate an explanation that does not resort to
>>> monads. I haven't studied them yet and I'm sure I'd struggle to
>>> understand any explanation that resorts to monads.
>>>
>>
>> I think you should google that first... do blocks are just sugar...
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> - Olumide
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 17:17:43 +0530
From: "Sumit Sahrawat, Maths & Computing, IIT (BHU)"
<[email protected]>
To: The Haskell-Beginners Mailing List - Discussion of primarily
beginner-level topics related to Haskell <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] Do IO actions *have* to be glued by
the do syntax?
Message-ID:
<cajbew8psgq1svyznd-+agkzddcyudcprdc210z7ferry67h...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Sorry, autocorrect changed learnhaskell to something else.
On 22-Mar-2016 5:16 pm, "Sumit Sahrawat, Maths & Computing, IIT (BHU)" <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Olumide, do blocks are indeed syntactic sugar. They are a piece of syntax
> that converts to a specific type of expressions, namely those using the
> bind (>>=) operator.
>
> It is really helpful, when learning to be able to come up with answers in
> your own. Learning Haskell has always involved combining many different
> perspectives on the same topic, told differently in different places. It
> would only help you if you took the time and dug further for answers. It's
> really satisfying too!
>
> Also, if you haven't, search for the Leavenworth guide. It takes this very
> question in one of the miscellaneous discussions.
>
> Be nice, be respectful. Have fun learning Haskell :)
> On 22-Mar-2016 5:07 pm, "Olumide" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Quanyang,
>>
>> do bocks are *not* sugar, and please refer to Daniel's answer for an
>> example of how to answer a beginner's question.
>>
>> - Olumide
>>
>> On 22/03/2016 11:06, Quanyang Liu wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 22 2016 at 18:52:41 +0800, Olumide wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello List,
>>>>
>>>> Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax? Many, if not all,
>>>> the examples that I've come across in LYH seem to suggest so. And if
>>>> so, why?
>>>>
>>>> BTW, if possible I'd appreciate an explanation that does not resort to
>>>> monads. I haven't studied them yet and I'm sure I'd struggle to
>>>> understand any explanation that resorts to monads.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I think you should google that first... do blocks are just sugar...
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> - Olumide
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Beginners mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/attachments/20160322/1ef24d39/attachment.html>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beginners
------------------------------
End of Beginners Digest, Vol 93, Issue 16
*****************************************
