Hi, Am Mittwoch, den 02.07.2008, 16:43 +0100 schrieb ChrisK: > > hen, the readFileOD could put the timestamp > > of the read file in a Monad-local state and the writeFileOD could, if > > the output is newer then all inputs listed in the state, skip the > > writing and thus the unsafeInterleaveIO’ed file reads are skipped as > > well, if they were not required for deciding the flow of the program. > > How is your system similar to make/Makefile or different to > make/Makefile ? > > Are your actions more restricted? Are the semantics more imperative? Are > the > dependencies still explicit or are them implicit and inferred?
I think the biggest difference is that with Make, you have to explicitly list all dependencies, which is what I want to avoid by having the Monad keep record of the used files. So it’s mostly a convenience thingy, altough a monad would be generally more flexible, e.g. deciding the output file name based on some content of the some of the input files. I have some code that I’ll put somewhere soon. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim Breitner e-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.joachim-breitner.de ICQ#: 74513189 Jabber-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
