RE: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
"R.S. Nikhil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, > > -Original Message- > > From: Manuel M. T. Chakravarty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 1999 4:35 AM > > ... > > > > * While Sisal is arguably nice than Fortran, it doesn't > > really provide a new killer feature

Re: What is a functional language? (Was: Re: Functional languages and ... (was: Cryptarithm solver ...))

1999-09-22 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 04:57:58PM +0100, D. Tweed wrote: > Firstly let me check that we mean the same thing by _higher order > functions, namely they are functions which return functions ... or take functions as parameters. Such as map, foldr, iterate, etc. -- %%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EM

Re: Haskell's efficiency

1999-09-22 Thread Ralf Muschall
S.D.Mechveliani wrote: > Thus, the recent example with the Cryptarithm solver was a very > in-correct comparison, due to the unknown permutation generating > order. I did not study the problem in detail, but I think giving it an unsolvable puzzle would force it to try *all* permutations, thus el

Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
Bjorn Lisper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, > "Manuel M. T. Chakravarty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >* While Sisal is arguably nice than Fortran, it doesn't > > really provide a new killer feature - rewriting all this > > Fortran code, just for getting nice programs is maybe not > > enough of an incen

ANN: CTKlight 0.17.11

1999-09-22 Thread Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
The self-optimising lexer and parser combinators of the Compiler Toolkit (CTK) are now available standalone in the CTKlight distribution. The code is tested to work with GHC 4.04 and Hugs 98. I presume that it also works with HBC and NHC 98[1]. Details and download at http://www.score.is.tsu

new version of: Fast, Error Correcting Parser Combinators

1999-09-22 Thread Doaitse Swierstra
I have been polishing the ,,"Fast, Error Correcting Parser Combinators", and as a result they are now so much faster (for some applications more than three times) that you may consider downloading the newest version from http://www.cs.uu.nl/groups/ST/Software/Parse/ I also fixed a

Sisal (was: RE: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++)

1999-09-22 Thread R.S. Nikhil
> -Original Message- > From: Manuel M. T. Chakravarty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 1999 10:06 AM > ... > > "R.S. Nikhil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, > > > ... > > But it DID offer an important new feature relative to > > the original Fortran programs it was

Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
Bjorn Lisper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, > "D. Tweed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >I'm quite open to arguments that maybe you can't > >make a functional language that's as nice as Haskell (features like lazy > >evaluation, nice type classes, etc) that's also able to `really hammer > >until it's totally

What is a functional language? (Was: Re: Functional languages and ... (was: Cryptarithm solver ...))

1999-09-22 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 02:53:03PM +0100, Claus Reinke wrote: > Functional programming, i.e., programming with functions, is possible in > languages that do not support all features that have become common in > many functional languages. [eg. higher-order functions] Well then, it appears that I h

Re: What is a functional language?

1999-09-22 Thread Claus Reinke
Such questions are bound to end up in language wars. I'll try a neutral approach below to stop this sub-thread right here and now, but if anyone really wants to follow this question any further, may I suggest to take this general part of the discussion to comp.lang.functional? >On Wed, Sep 22, 1

Re: What is a functional language? (Was: Re: Functional languages and ... (was: Cryptarithm solver ...))

1999-09-22 Thread D. Tweed
On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: > On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 02:53:03PM +0100, Claus Reinke wrote: > > Functional programming, i.e., programming with functions, is possible in > > languages that do not support all features that have become common in > > many functional languages.

Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
22 Sep 1999 09:43:19 +0100, Will Partain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze: > * You can drop down to non-standard Haskell, and express > your code with (e.g.) unboxed values, bytePrimArray#s, -- > i.e. direct access to the machinery that GHC's libraries > use; Hmm, I think it would be more usable

Re: Haskell's efficiency

1999-09-22 Thread Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
Wed, 22 Sep 1999 14:26:03 +0400 (MSD), S.D.Mechveliani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze: > So far, no clear progrm example appeared in this list to demonstrate > Haskell's in-efficiency in comparison to other languages. I have not done benchmarking myself yet, but in

Functional languages and efficient implementations (was: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++)

1999-09-22 Thread Claus Reinke
Crossposted to the SAC mailing list because I'm curious to learn whether there is any chance to get the best of both worlds.. {- Summary for the readers of sac-list: this is from a thread on the Haskell mailing-list, discussing the old problem of whether functional language implementations (h

Haskell's efficiency

1999-09-22 Thread S.D.Mechveliani
Juergen Pfitzenmaier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote P> I dont't care very much how fast a program runs. I care about how P> long it takes me to write it. If you take a programming task of P> reasonable complexity you will finish *months* earlier using a P> --good-- functional language instead of C++.

Re: Gnome binding [was: Re: Licenses and Libraries]

1999-09-22 Thread Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, > On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, Hannah Schroeter wrote: > > > > Frankly, I'd like it to use Corba from Haskell with ORBit > > alone rather to have to install much additional Gnome stuff I'm > > probably not using elsewhere anyway. > > I just joined the list an

Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread Pieter Koopman
At 10:41 21/09/99 GMT, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote: >... >I have to care how fast my programs run. >... >I had to write and maintain a boring program calculating lots of >numbers from matrices, trying various permutations of rows and columns, >joining rows and columns, generating random matri

Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 09:44:34AM +0200, Bjorn Lisper wrote: > Sisal was an attempt to define precisely such a functional language. ... > no higher order functions Uhh... have I misunderstood what functional programming is? Isn't higher-order function support a necessary part of every FP langu

Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread Bjorn Lisper
"Manuel M. T. Chakravarty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >* While Sisal is arguably nice than Fortran, it doesn't > really provide a new killer feature - rewriting all this > Fortran code, just for getting nice programs is maybe not > enough of an incentive. As I remember it, a main argument for Sisal

RE: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread R.S. Nikhil
> -Original Message- > From: Manuel M. T. Chakravarty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 1999 4:35 AM > ... > > * While Sisal is arguably nice than Fortran, it doesn't > really provide a new killer feature - rewriting all this > Fortran code, just for getting

Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread Bjorn Lisper
"D. Tweed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >I'm quite open to arguments that maybe you can't >make a functional language that's as nice as Haskell (features like lazy >evaluation, nice type classes, etc) that's also able to `really hammer >until it's totally flat' functional code that implements heavily nume

Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++

1999-09-22 Thread Will Partain
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk) writes: > I have to care how fast my programs run. I like writing in Haskell > very much, it's my favorite general-purpose language, but one of the > biggest weak points of Haskell for me is poor efficiency (at least > with ghc, I don't know how fast

Re: What is a functional language? (Was: Re: Functional languages and ... (was: Cryptarithm solver ...)) (fwd)

1999-09-22 Thread Ronald J. Legere
On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: > On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 02:53:03PM +0100, Claus Reinke wrote: > > Functional programming, i.e., programming with functions, is possible in > > languages that do not support all features that have become common in > > many functional languages.

Re: Licenses and Libraries

1999-09-22 Thread Hannah Schroeter
Hello! On Fri, Aug 27, 1999 at 09:41:22PM +0900, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty wrote: > [...] > > Better make it work with Corba, which is the basement of the IPC used > > for Gnome, but not only that. For a first touch, one could use the > > standard C mapping via the GHC FFI (is that implemented in