Brian Hulley wrote:
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
compulsory". Perhaps you could improve the wording to make it more
unambiguous?
Indeed, if we've converged, would you like to fold into our draft
whatever you think is useful from yours?
[snip]
Therefore it seems best to just leave them as the
On 2006-07-06, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> a. we could put package names in module names as you suggest. But
> apart from sacrificing the second principle, this doesn't let
> you import a module from a package without specifying the exact
> version of the package ==>
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
1) Qualified names:
import A.B.C( T1 ) from "foo"
import A.B.C( T2 ) from "bar"
type S = A.B.C.T1 -> A.B.C.T2
I'd suggest that the above should give a compiler error that A.B.C is
ambiguous (as a qualifier), rather than allowing T1 to disambiguate
it, because oth
I encounter a strange behavior with functional dependencies. Assume we
have a class defined as
class Foo x y | x -> y where
foo :: x -> y
and another class
class Bar x y where
bar :: x -> y -> Int
and I want to write the instance declaration
instance (Foo x y, Bar y z) => Bar x z where
bar x
| 1) Qualified names:
|
| import A.B.C( T1 ) from "foo"
| import A.B.C( T2 ) from "bar"
| type S = A.B.C.T1 -> A.B.C.T2
|
| I'd suggest that the above should give a compiler error that A.B.C is
| ambiguous (as a qualifier), rather than allowing T1 to disambiguate
it,
| because otherwise it
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Brian
Actually re-reading my post I realised I may have sounded a bit
negative about the hard work you'd done to collate the various
responses to form the wiki proposal - my apologies
Thanks -- email is a fragile medium!
I've followed your suggestion and made a se
Hi Simon,
I followed the instruction in DebuggingGhcCrashes, and the
instructions in the ghc commentary for building an rts with debugging
and symbols. (Please let me know if there are any mistakes in
these instructions that you know of!)
The crash seems to always happen eventually, but I do n
Gregory Wright wrote:
I submitted a patch for ticket #766 this afternoon.
Thanks, now comitted and merged.
I've banged my head on ticket #751, building with debugging symbols
and running under gdb, but have yet to get any useful information that
would pin down the bug.
Does http://hackage.
John Meacham wrote:
Package names should never appear in source files IMHO. if a package
name is in the source file, then you might as well make it part of the
module name. packages exist for 'meta-organization' of code. A way to
deal with mapping code _outside_ of the language itself, putting
pa
Brian
| Actually re-reading my post I realised I may have sounded a bit
negative
| about the hard work you'd done to collate the various responses to
form the
| wiki proposal - my apologies
Thanks -- email is a fragile medium!
| I've followed your suggestion and made a separate page at
|
http:/
10 matches
Mail list logo
