Interesting, I hadn't thought of the SYB approach. I still need to get
through those papers. Actually, I wonder if this idea would help with
something else I was looking into. It seems like it might occasionally
be useful to have a monad that is the identity, except that it forces
evaluation as it
On 22/10/06, Chad Scherrer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I had posted this question a while back, but I think it was in the
middle of another discussion, and I never did get a reply. Do we
really need both Control.Parallel.Strategies.rnf and deepSeq? Should
we not always have
x `deepSeq` y ==
Hello Udo,
Sunday, October 22, 2006, 6:41:24 PM, you wrote:
>> Now, the state will not be entirely consumed/evaluated by the user,
>> and so it will not become garbage. Am I right?
> No. The state cannot become garbage, because there is still a reference
> to it. As long as runStateT has not r
Hello Andrea,
Sunday, October 22, 2006, 6:06:24 PM, you wrote:
>> f a b = let x = a*b
>> y = a+b
>> in x `seq` y `seq` (x,y)
>>
>> this f definition will not evaluate x and y automatically. BUT its
>> returned value is not (x,y). its returned value is x `seq` y `seq` (x,y)
>>
Hi,
I had posted this question a while back, but I think it was in the
middle of another discussion, and I never did get a reply. Do we
really need both Control.Parallel.Strategies.rnf and deepSeq? Should
we not always have
x `deepSeq` y == rnf x `seq` y
?
Maybe there's a distinction I'm missin
Andrea Rossato wrote:
> Now, the state will not be entirely consumed/evaluated by the user,
> and so it will not become garbage. Am I right?
No. The state cannot become garbage, because there is still a reference
to it. As long as runStateT has not returned, any part of the state can
still be ac
Hello Bullat,
first of all, thanks for your lengthy and clear explanation.
On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 04:08:49PM +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
> f a b = let x = a*b
> y = a+b
> in x `seq` y `seq` (x,y)
>
> this f definition will not evaluate x and y automatically. BUT its
> ret
Look in http://darcs.augustsson.net/Darcs/, it's in the CReal
repository.
-- Lennart
On Oct 20, 2006, at 06:19 , Henning Thielemann wrote:
On
http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/ExactRealArithmetic
there is a module by David Lester mentioned, with a link to
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/arc
Hello Andrea,
Sunday, October 22, 2006, 1:37:55 PM, you wrote:
>> as Udo said, it should be better to evaluate thunks just when they are
>> created, by using proper 'seq' calls.
> While I understand why you and Udo are right, still it is difficult
> for me to related this discussion to my code.
Hello!
On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 12:27:05AM +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
> as Udo said, it should be better to evaluate thunks just when they are
> created, by using proper 'seq' calls.
While I understand why you and Udo are right, still it is difficult
for me to related this discussion to my code
Oleg,
On 10/20/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tim Smith wrote:
> Has anyone found out how to lift bracket into another monad?
Yes, please see the thread `Re: Control.Exceptions and MonadIO'
staring at
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2006-April/015444.html
Th
11 matches
Mail list logo
