Part I of the series introduced the type-level functional language
with the notation that resembles lambda-calculus with case
distinction, fixpoint recursion, etc. Modulo a bit of syntactic tart,
the language of the type functions even looks almost like the pure
Haskell. In this message, we show
This is the first message in a series on arbitrary type/kind-level
computations in the present-day Haskell, and on using of so computed
types to give signatures to terms and to drive the selection of
overloaded functions. We can define the type TD N to be the type of a
tree fib(N)-level deep, and
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 01:45:46AM +1000, Jeremy Wazny wrote:
> The performance of the Haskell code is not an issue.
> [...]
> The alternative is to admit defeat and rewrite all the Haskell code as
> C++, which is pretty depressing.
If performance is not an issue, then maybe another alternative
-
Hi all,
I'm wondering if anybody has had any success building shared objects
from Haskell code on x86 Linux and/or Sparc Solaris.
I have some Haskell source which I am trying to integrate into a C/C++
library which I am maintaining at the same time. The performance of the
Haskell code is not an
Don,
>Let's run QuickCheck (check) head to head with SmallCheck (scheck):
>...
>lambdabot> scheck \s -> not (null s) ==> minimum (s :: [Int]) == (last .
> sort) s
> Failed test no. 10. Test values follow.: [-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,0]
>
>lambdabot> check \s -> not (null s) ==> minimum (
