RE: Mutable hash?

2004-10-25 Thread Simon Marlow
On 23 October 2004 19:25, Lauri Alanko wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 09:17:20AM -0400, Robert Dockins wrote: >> There is a hashtable in the IO monad: >> >> http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/base/Data.HashTabl e.html > > Why is it in IO instead of the more general ST? IMHO

RE: Change in ghc-6.2.2 distribution files

2004-10-25 Thread Simon Marlow
Sorry I should have broadcast a message about this; I mentioned it to the *BSD guys because I knew they'd be affected, but forgot about darwinports. Sorry about that. Cheers, Simon On 23 October 2004 20:27, Gregory Wright wrote: > Hi Sven, > > Yes, that would be it. The change is harml

RE: Are handles closed automatically when they fall out of scope?

2004-10-25 Thread Simon Marlow
On 22 October 2004 21:58, Peter Simons wrote: > I know it's a rather mundane question, but I couldn't find > an answer to it! > > So what does happen when I forget to hClose a Handle? Will > the garbage collector do that for me? Or not? Yes, a Handle will be automatically closed sometime after i

Re: Are handles closed automatically when they fall out of scope?

2004-10-25 Thread Peter Simons
Simon Marlow writes: > BTW, I assume you have a good reason for wanting to call > terminateProcess Yes, I have to abort the process in case of an exception in my code. Just giving it EOF is not enough, unfortunately. Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer, Simon. I really appreciate it. P

Re: Are handles closed automatically when they fall out of scope?

2004-10-25 Thread John Goerzen
On 2004-10-25, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 22 October 2004 21:58, Peter Simons wrote: > > On 24 October 2004 23:37, John Goerzen wrote: > >> * What happens when one Handle corresponding to a socket is closed, >> but another isn't? > > You shouldn't have two Handles on the same so

RE: Are handles closed automatically when they fall out of scope?

2004-10-25 Thread Simon Marlow
On 25 October 2004 14:24, John Goerzen wrote: > On 2004-10-25, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 22 October 2004 21:58, Peter Simons wrote: >> >> On 24 October 2004 23:37, John Goerzen wrote: >> >>> * What happens when one Handle corresponding to a socket is closed, >>> but another

Re: Are handles closed automatically when they fall out of scope?

2004-10-25 Thread John Goerzen
On 2004-10-25, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> If I tried that with a single Handle opened ReadWrite, then I'd get >> errors about it being closed whenever I'd try to write out some data. >> >> I wasn't able to find any other good way around it. > > Hmmm, you should still be able to *wr

Re: Are handles closed automatically when they fall out of scope?

2004-10-25 Thread Peter Simons
John Goerzen writes: > Now, if [I read with hGetContents h], then the first read > I try to make using it works, but subsequent ones don't, > since the first one made it half-closed already. Maybe I misunderstood something ... but why do you need to read from the stream multiple times after ca

Re: Are handles closed automatically when they fall out of scope?

2004-10-25 Thread John Goerzen
On 2004-10-25, Peter Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John Goerzen writes: > > > Now, if [I read with hGetContents h], then the first read > > I try to make using it works, but subsequent ones don't, > > since the first one made it half-closed already. > > Maybe I misunderstood something ... but

Re: Are handles closed automatically when they fall out of scope?

2004-10-25 Thread David Brown
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 09:42:13PM +, John Goerzen wrote: > > Maybe I misunderstood something ... but why do you need to > > read from the stream multiple times after calling > > hGetContents? The function returns the _entire_ (lazily > > evaluated) input stream, there is no need to read again

Is it safe to call getProcessExitCode more than once?

2004-10-25 Thread Peter Simons
What will happen if I call getProcessExitCode for the same process twice? Will that block? Cause an error? Or return the same child's exit code again? I assume the function is (under Unix) based on wait(2), right? In that case, how does the following warning from the manual page translate to Haske

Re: Is it safe to call getProcessExitCode more than once?

2004-10-25 Thread John Goerzen
On 2004-10-26, Peter Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What will happen if I call getProcessExitCode for the same > process twice? Will that block? Cause an error? Or return > the same child's exit code again? Assuming it is based on wait() or one of its derivatives, and I suspect it is, you can

Dynamic Source Loading

2004-10-25 Thread S. Alexander Jacobson
I am writing a web application server in Haskell. I would like to be able to modify the app on the fly. Simplyfing the app server, it would look like this: appServer appMVar reqChan state = do req <- readChan reqChan app <- readMVar appMVar (state',resp) <- return $ app

Re: Dynamic Source Loading

2004-10-25 Thread Donald Bruce Stewart
haskell: > I am writing a web application server in Haskell. > I would like to be able to modify the app on the > fly. Simplyfing the app server, it would look > like this: > >appServer appMVar reqChan state = > do > req <- readChan reqChan > app <- readMVar appMVar > (

Re: Dynamic Source Loading

2004-10-25 Thread Shae Matijs Erisson
"S. Alexander Jacobson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That lets you load "object files." But I would > really like something that loads source files > instead http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/hs-plugins/index.html hs-plugins can build and load source, and check dependencies, and lots more.