On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 04:57:34PM -0500, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> What about a more prosaic implementation:
>
> notFollowedBy' :: Show a => GenParser tok st a -> GenParser tok st ()
> notFollowedBy' p= do res <- do a <- try p; return $ Just a
> <
Thank you for the link to FGL. I also looked at
the boilerplate stuff. If *feels* like there
should be a way to embed the graph stuff in the
boilerplate stuff to allow non-destructive update
of arbitrary object graphs without handcoding the
mapping of the datastructure to an object graph?
Is thi
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ben Rudiak-Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Bear in mind you can't even write IO (forall t. whatever) in Haskell.
>
> True, but why is this? Is there a deep reason why we can use nested
> foralls as the arguments to (->), but not as the arguments to any other
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 07:48:52PM +, Graham Klyne wrote:
> Thanks! That got me going, though not with quite what you suggested.
>
> I ended up with this:
> [[
> notMatching :: Show a => GenParser tok st a -> GenParser tok st ()
> notMatching p = do { a <- try p ; unexpected (show a) } <|> re
Hi,
does hugs Nov 2003 allow to increase the space for the program being
loaded? (This is not the heap size!)
Cheers Christian
___
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Thanks! That got me going, though not with quite what you suggested.
I ended up with this:
[[
notMatching :: Show a => GenParser tok st a -> GenParser tok st ()
notMatching p = do { a <- try p ; unexpected (show a) } <|> return ()
]]
which does the required job for me.
Using your version caused t
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 06:42:39PM +, Graham Klyne wrote:
> I've attempted to define a Parsec combinator thus:
>
> [[
> notMatching :: Show a => GenParser tok st a -> GenParser tok st ()
> notMatching p = try ( do { a <- p ; unexpected (show a) } <|> return () )
> ]]
If p fails but consumes s
I've attempted to define a Parsec combinator thus:
[[
notMatching :: Show a => GenParser tok st a -> GenParser tok st ()
notMatching p = try ( do { a <- p ; unexpected (show a) } <|> return () )
]]
It's modelled on the Parsec-provided combinator 'notFollowedBy', but is
less fussy about the type o
At 10:35 17/02/04 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
We didn't choose Latin-1 over UTF-8: the current situation just reflects
the fact that we haven't implemented UTF-8 yet. It's not trivial to
expand GHC's current Alex specification to handle the whole Unicode
character set. See this message for some mu
Robert Will wrote:
4.
A notation for preconditions. For simple functions a Precondition
can be calculated automatically from the Patterns:
head (x:xs) = x
Gives the Precondition @xs /= []@ for @head [EMAIL PROTECTED] This only needs
some simple knowledge about
> >It may seem so to western europeans, but others may differ.
> >A case could be made for UTF-8.
>
> I tend to agree. Further, the choice of defaulting to
> Latin-1 seems a
> strange one when much of the rest of the world (well, the
> networking world)
> seems to be moving towards more uni
> import QuickCheck
Dear developers of QuickCheck and Haddock,
Dear Haskell-Community,
((Summary: I'm trying to find notations for Design by Contract in Haskell
which can be standardised to be used by tools like Haddock and
QuickCheck. This will give Haskell programmers an order-of-magnitude
12 matches
Mail list logo
