On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 15:46:56 -0500
"David Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vincenzo,
>
> I agree with your feeling of the expressive superiority of functional
> programming compared to C and even C++, although I would not use the
> word "hell" ;-)
Just because you are not using wxwin and PR
On 27 Nov 2002 23:22:31 +
Alastair Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think you've been spoilt by the availability of 4 good compilers,
> lots of libraries, an active research community, etc. for the Haskell
> "research language".
I don't know what "to spoil" means in this contests
Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 10:21:53PM +, Alistair Bayley wrote:
>> Wouldn't this have been better called "unique"? (analogous to the Unix
>> program "uniq"). I was looking for a "unique" in the GHC Data.List library a
>> few days ago, and didn't see
At 2002-06-29 14:43, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
>To simplify things a bit, let's take a simpler Parser type which doesn't
>use monad state transformers but simple state transformers instead. This
>makes the type ParserState simpler. You can think of a parser state as
>an infinite list of substate-tok
Hello,
I hope I understand what's going on; if not please someone correct me.
I have problems with monads and memory. I have a monad through which
I thread output. If I do the concatenation of the output-strings in
one way Hugs runs out of memory, but if I do it in another way
everything works.
Folks,
As you know, Cambridge University Press are doing us the huge service of publishing
the Haskell 98 report, both as a special issue of the Journal of Functional
Programming (Jan 2003) and as a hardback book (it'll cost around £35).
I'm very, very, very happy to say that, following discuss
Hmm, I remained relatively quiet throughout the discussion, as I didn't
expect to buy the book version, and my worries about the online version
were being addressed by others, but as a Haskell user and (occasional)
paper author, I would like to register that CUP's handling of copyrights
here is def
I find that nub is nearly always the wrong tool for the job (unless
the job is trivial quickie coding). I'll point out that:
> map head . group . sort
has O(n lg n) asymptotic complexity, whereas nub or (sort . nub) both
are O(n^2). This fact seems all too frequently forgotten. For short
lists
HaXml-1.08
--
http://www.haskell.org/HaXml/
We announce a fresh release of HaXml, a collection of libraries and
tools for using XML from Haskell. This is mainly a bug-fix release.
What is new in 1.08?
Just to add to what Zdenek wrote:
The linear complexity of string concatenation in a naïve implementation
(not having access to an extra-language "end-of-list" in the "diff list"
sense...) make the total complexity O(n^2), since the number of conses
generated is thus
sum [1 .. n]
which,
[Resend, sorry for any duplicates you might get.]
On 20021129T102259-, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> The copyright will still be (c) Simon Peyton Jones (as it has for some
> while; it has to be attached to someone or some thing),
AIUI, legally it is attached to everyone who has ever contributed
[Apologies for multiple copies]
[Please, post as you deemed appropriate]
The CLIP Group, Technical University of Madrid (UPM), offers 2
pre-doctoral, 4-year scholarships (research assistant level) available
within the area of programming language technology: program analysis,
transformation, and
12 matches
Mail list logo
