I've written just a few programs in Haskell one in a comparison for a
task I had "nearly daily".
The code analyzes Apache logs and picks some certain stuff from it and
after that calculates a bit around with it.
Here's the code
module Main where
import System
import System.IO
import System.Direct
H
mm..
The totals in "sum" and "count" are not computed until printed. This is too
lazy. You start with '0' and (+) things to it, but never examine or force the
value, so man many (+) thunks are built up in memory.
If you use bang patterns then the change can be made here, to !sum !count:
---
Haskell Weekly News
http://sequence.complete.org/hwn/20081018
Issue 89 - October 18, 2008
---
Welcome to issue 89 of HWN, a newsletter covering
Friedrich wrote:
I've written just a few programs in Haskell one in a comparison for a
task I had "nearly daily".
The first thing I notice is that this is clearly a direct translation
from something like Perl. Thats understandable, but I'd suggest
rewriting it with something like this (unte
> The answer is that QuickCheck can't correctly constructively verify an
> existential condition without a constructive mechanism to generate the
> existential (i.e. the Skolem function mentioned before).
I agree but don't think it's relevant. QuickCheck can't verify a
universal either.
> If
Marshall Beddoe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, read some chapters from here:
> http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/
>
> Indispensable examples for writing higher performance log processing
> code.
I hope this book will soon be send out. I ordered my copy of course
;-)
Howerver even if Stri
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Friedrich wrote:
>> I've written just a few programs in Haskell one in a comparison for a
>> task I had "nearly daily".
>>
> The first thing I notice is that this is clearly a direct translation
>> From something like Perl. Thats understandable, but I'd
