On Mon, Sep 12, 2016, at 05:53 AM, Clive Lee wrote:
> I am a beginner in a mess over file type
> I wrote a little Haskell source code 6 months ago and returning I find
> the source files have type Haskell Source File”
> When I try to store new source code it fails to load either “not
I am a beginner in a mess over file type
I wrote a little Haskell source code 6 months ago and returning I find the
source files have type Haskell Source File"
When I try to store new source code it fails to load either "not found" or
"does not contain module or source code
Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Am Sonntag, 6. Januar 2008 13:37 schrieb Adrian Hey:
It's the GT class here..
Short remark: Wouldn’t a longer, more descriptive identifier be better?
Like "GeeTee" maybe? or even "GeneralisedTrie"?
I like short names myself. But as I have stopped work on this particu
Am Sonntag, 6. Januar 2008 13:37 schrieb Adrian Hey:
> It's the GT class here..
Short remark: Wouldn’t a longer, more descriptive identifier be better?
Best wishes,
Wolfgang
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
[email protected]
http:/
Johannes Waldmann wrote:
Brian Hulley wrote:
In the long term, Haskell needs a better module system IMHO [...]
I agree with the symptoms that were described, but I draw a different
conclusion.
We don't need to change the language - we need better tools (IDEs)
that operate not at the textual
Christian Maeder wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
Regarding Data.Map, I'd be interested in trying out AVL trees instead,
to see if they have better performance, but then we'd have to import the
code of course.
Surely, we want the best maps possible for ghc and as public library
(and minimize mainten
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian Hulley wrote:
> In the long term, Haskell needs a better module system IMHO [...]
I agree with the symptoms that were described, but I draw a different
conclusion.
We don't need to change the language - we need better tools (IDEs)
that operat
Brian Hulley wrote:
Ian Lynagh wrote:
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 08:34:22AM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| 4. A more radical change would be introducing hierarchical modules.
Sorry I quoted what Simon PJ replied to not what he wrote so I should
have written:
> Ian Lynagh wrote:
>>
>>>
Ian Lynagh wrote:
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 08:34:22AM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| 4. A more radical change would be introducing hierarchical modules.
It's a pity that GHC.* is already used in base. I'm not sure what the
best thing to do is in the short term.
How about Language.Hask
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 08:34:22AM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
>
> | 4. A more radical change would be introducing hierarchical modules. This
> | could be just a matter of renaming the directories to start with an upper
> | case character and changing the import declarations. This gives mod
Simon Marlow wrote:
> Regarding Data.Map, I'd be interested in trying out AVL trees instead,
> to see if they have better performance, but then we'd have to import the
> code of course.
Surely, we want the best maps possible for ghc and as public library
(and minimize maintenance).
The problem is
Hi
Yhc did a few of these things, and our experiences were:
> 1a. Use do notation where possible instead of `thenXX`.
If it is that simple, yes. Certainly Yhc uses "super-monads" which
made this a bit painful. You should probably step this by getting it
to the stage where thenXX = >>=, then on
Twan van Laarhoven wrote:
Hello GHC people,
I was trying my hand at some GHC hacking, and I couldn't help but notice
that much of the code looks (IMHO) horrible. There are some things that
look as if they haven't been touched since the Haskell 1.3 days. The
most striking is the use of `thenXX
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| 4. A more radical change would be introducing hierarchical modules. This
| could be just a matter of renaming the directories to start with an upper
| case character and changing the import declarations. This gives module names
| like "Typecheck.TcGadt". The tc is re
Twan,
In general I'd be delighted for you to clean up GHC's code -- thank you! There
is a slight down-side which is that because you end up touching a lot of code,
you get a big patch that means you can't selectively pick patches from before
and after the change -- but I'm not too bothered abo
Hello GHC people,
I was trying my hand at some GHC hacking, and I couldn't help but notice
that much of the code looks (IMHO) horrible. There are some things that look
as if they haven't been touched since the Haskell 1.3 days. The most
striking is the use of `thenXX` instead of do notation.
GHC 6.8.1's docs no longer link to the source code in the upper right-hand
corner of each module. Intentional?
http://haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/
Thanks,
Greg
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskel
I did some more digging and it looks like Mac OS X (BASH? BASH on Mac OS
X? BSD? POSIX?) limits the number of files that a program can have open.
Increasing this limit makes the issue disappear.
By default, user accounts are limited to 256 open files (per process?) but
this can be changed with u
> It would also be nice to have the
> case issue with Mac OS X document, as recent file systems have been
> case-insensitive for a while.
Just a quick note: At Mac OS X install time
(or other file system creation time)
you can choose case sensitivity for HPFS+
(the default file system on Mac
. So go right ahead.
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
| Richard Giraud
| Sent: 08 November 2007 04:08
| To: [email protected]
| Subject: Re: Getting source code
|
| I figured out a way to work around it.
|
| In
nsitive for a while.
Should I add this info to the page? I'm not sure what the policy is
around wiki edits.
Richard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
I'm trying to get the source code for development purposes (helping add
some Haddock documentation for TH). I tried following the steps
Hello
I'm trying to get the source code for development purposes (helping add
some Haddock documentation for TH). I tried following the steps listed on
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Building/GettingTheSources and
ran into trouble.
I downloaded ghc-HEAD-2007-08-29-ghc-cor
> Does any one have any sample code for the haskell GHC compiler. All I
> have are examples of code meant for HUGS.
>
> If you can help me please send me acopy of the code so I can know what
> the syntax is for this compiler.
The basic language, Haskell 98, of both systems is the
same. Check ou
hi,
Does any one have any sample code for the haskell GHC compiler. All I
have are examples of code meant for HUGS.
If you can help me please send me acopy of the code so I can know what
the syntax is for this compiler.
k or not, and
> produce a more informative error message by hand in the latter case.
>
> Is there a more elegant way to figure out where the error occurred?
> Maybe a compiler switch that makes the program dump the source code
> position where (!!) was accessed?
>
That would
ative error message by hand in the latter case.
>
> Is there a more elegant way to figure out where the error occurred?
> Maybe a compiler switch that makes the program dump the source code
> position where (!!) was accessed?
Sadly no. I've just been debugging Happy and got t
the latter case.
Is there a more elegant way to figure out where the error occurred?
Maybe a compiler switch that makes the program dump the source code
position where (!!) was accessed?
(I checked the documentation, but could not find a clue.)
thanks,
Matthias
--
Max-Planck-Institut
27 matches
Mail list logo
