Sat, 20 May 2000 13:13:53 -0700, Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
f x = assert (p x) (...x...)
where assert :: Bool - a - a
If the boolean is False, you get an error message pinpointing the
line in the file. Now, a function with an assert that always fails
is indeed a
Sat, 20 May 2000 13:13:22 -0700, Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Explicit lists [a,b,c]
List comprehensions
Numeric constants (1 means 'fromInteger 1')
do notation
Here is an idea for an extension to Haskell 98 to support this.
[...]
It has small
On 21-May-2000, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sat, 20 May 2000 13:13:22 -0700, Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Explicit lists [a,b,c]
List comprehensions
Numeric constants (1 means 'fromInteger 1')
do notation
Here is an idea for an
On my proposal for minBy, gcd ... :: [a] - a
and remark on +, ... being the exceptions
Matt Harden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 19 May 2000
(+), () ... are different. Because they have classical tradition
to be applied as binary infix operations.
And gcd, min, max, lcm have not
Sun, 21 May 2000 17:26:13 +1000, Fergus Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
But being able to import and/or re-export such symbols is necessary
if you want to be able to implement an alternative prelude.
No: they can be simply always available, just as \ and let.
Standard Prelude has to be
Sun, 21 May 2000 11:53:39 +0400 (MSD), S.D.Mechveliani [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
The economy of names is more important.
Convenience of programming is important too. Many Prelude functions
are unnecessary, but are convenient. (++) and concat are not needed
(you can write flip (foldr (:)) for
To my
| Here is some strange question:
| how to force the compiler to evaluate some things more statically
| and to convert some run-time errors into the compile-time ones?
Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Not strange at all. It would be quite reasonable to have some way
to
On 21-May-2000, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sun, 21 May 2000 17:26:13 +1000, Fergus Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
But being able to import and/or re-export such symbols is necessary
if you want to be able to implement an alternative prelude.
No: they can be
Sun, 21 May 2000 17:26:13 +1000, Fergus Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
On a related note, Hugs and ghc both allow the following module
module Bar(List(..)) where
type List = []
without complaint, but according to the Haskell report (5.2) the
syntax `typename(..)' should only be
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
a function with an assert that always fails
is indeed a good candidate for a compile-time error message.
When I developed compilers for Fortran and C++, from time to time we would
get reports from customers that the compiler had failed to diagnose an
error in their
to tell the compiler 'evaluate this to a static value'. I'd suggest
doing it via a pseudo-function
static :: a - a
which behaved like the identity function, except that it evaluated
its argument rather eagerly at compile time.
AFAIK eagerness isn't addressed by the Haskell language.
"S.D.Mechveliani" wrote:
When processing this tree, it would be natural to write in each node
m + b and min [m,b].
The former is "necessary" due to the infix-binary tradition.
The latter uses [,] because it is good to have one function min for a
list and for
Sergey Mechveliani wrote:
For example, the static error report for
if {-# static x #-} then error ...
else y
takes pace only when the compiler proves that `else' never performs,
when everything is computed "lazily".
If only I
To my
When processing this tree, it would be natural to write in each node
m + b and min [m,b].
The former is "necessary" due to the infix-binary tradition.
The latter uses [,] because it is good to have one function min for a
list and for the two elements.
14 matches
Mail list logo
