Peter Thiemann (Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 10:22:12AM -0800):
> > "SM" == Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> SM> This isn't a problem with the spec, I think. A TimeDiff of "1 month" is
> SM> precisely a difference, which, when added to a given ClockTime, produces
> SM> a ClockTim
Peter Thiemann (Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 12:40:14PM -0800):
> John's code illustrates TimeDiff's deficiencies perfectly:
>
> There is also a more fundamental problem with the TimeDiff data
> type. While seconds, minutes, hours, and days are clearly specified
> amounts of time, the duration of a month
Perhaps you should look at the Clean languages, which is similar to
Haskell, but has a feature called "uniqueness typing". Using the type
system, you can figure out the information that you are asking for and
as far as I know, their implementation is optimzed in the manner you
want. In fact, their
SM> TimeDiff isn't a "duration", it's a way of specifying time offsets whose
SM> duration depends on the base to which the offset is being added. If we
SM> only had constant-duration offsets, then there would be no way to say
SM> "give me a ClockTime for this time next Wednesday".
On Fri, 2003-02-07 at 21:25, Magnus Lindberg wrote:
> I am using the FiniteMap datatype and since Haskell never modifies
> variables but rather copies them (?) I wonder what the performance of
> the FiniteMap type is in Haskell. Lookup is of course done in O(log n)
> but is insertion done in O(n) o
Dmitry Malenko wrote (on 09-02-03 21:57 +0200):
> As part of my research I'm going to create prototype system implementing
> some extentions concerning at most module system to the language and to
> toy with it a little. So I wonder what is the best way to do that?
>
> Should I cope with compiler
No there isn't. Its in the revised version at
http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/haskell98-revised/haskell98-repor
t-html/index.html
I'll ask John to upload it.
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: Antony Courtney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: 07 February 2003 22:04
| To:
