Daniel Wagner wrote:
On 2013-07-18 10:46, harry wrote:
Why not let all types carry the dictionary automatically, or at least every
time that it's used, if that would incur a memory/performance penalty? GHC
tells me which context to add when it's missing, so it clearly knows.
I'm not sure the
Ertugrul Söylemez wrote:
Often demanded changes that may or may not happen in the future:
* base: Make Functor a superclass of Monad. One of the two most
commonly demanded change to the base library. Will break lots and
lots of code. Reason: Would greatly simplify a lot of
David Thomas wrote:
I'd also like to see these two. It occurs to me there may be language tweak
that could reduce breakage and add some
convenience in both cases. It would not surprise me at all if this has been
thought of, examined, and discarded, but I
don't have time to dig so I'll just
Dan Doel wrote:
I don't really think they're worth saving in general, though. I haven't missed
them, at least.
Maybe you haven't :-) My code is cluttered with redundant type contexts - I can't think of a similar redundancy in any
other language.
What does the ~ type operator mean? I've sometimes seen types such as (a ~ b) in error messages, but can't understand
what GHC is trying to tell me.
Thanks for any enlightenment!
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
...@gmx.de
To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Cc: Guy guytsalmave...@yahoo.com
Sent: Thursday, 9 June 2011, 2:06
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Type Constraints on Data Constructors
Hello,
you might be thinking of this type?
{-# LANGUAGE Rank2Types #-}
class Foo f where
foo :: a - f a
data Baz
Malcolm Wallace malcolm.wallace at me.com writes:
The class context on the data constructor buys you nothing extra in terms of
expressivity in the language.
All it does is force you to repeat the context on every function that uses the
datatype. For this reason, the
language committee has
{- continuing discussion from beginners@ -}
I have code such as
class Foo f where
foo :: a - f a
data Bar f a = Foo f = Bar {bar :: f a}
instance Foo (Bar f) where
foo a = Bar $ foo a
GHC insists that I put Foo f = on the instance declaration, even though the
constructor for Bar
On 06/06/2011 22:14, Evan Laforge wrote:
Back to Haskell: I agree, the choice of the comment delimiter was not the
best in light of the possibility to define operators containing it as a
substring. But changing it to have --| start a comment too might break
too much code (and eliminating -- as a
On 07/06/2011 10:45, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
On 7 June 2011 17:41, Guyguytsalmave...@yahoo.com wrote:
On 06/06/2011 22:14, Evan Laforge wrote:
Back to Haskell: I agree, the choice of the comment delimiter was not the
best in light of the possibility to define operators containing it as
On 07/06/2011 10:55, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
On 7 June 2011 17:50, Guyguytsalmave...@yahoo.com wrote:
On 07/06/2011 10:45, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
On 7 June 2011 17:41, Guyguytsalmave...@yahoo.comwrote:
I originally posted because I found that --| stood out much more clearly
On 07/06/2011 10:55, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
Another argument against special-casing --|: what happens if you
want to use a _different_ documentation generator (I don't know why
you would, but someone might) than Haddock, which uses a different
markup identifier?
We can declare new
-- followed by a symbol does not start a comment, thus for example, haddock
declarations must begin with -- |, and not --|.
What might --| mean, if not a comment? It doesn't seem possible to define it as
an operator.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
On 03/06/2011 12:01, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
I believe the motivating example that persuaded the Language Committee to allow
these symbols was
--
which is not of course used anywhere in the standard libraries, but is an
extremely nice symbol to have available in user code.
Seeing as no
On 03/06/2011 12:26, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
On 3 June 2011 19:19, Guyguytsalmave...@yahoo.com wrote:
On 03/06/2011 12:01, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
I believe the motivating example that persuaded the Language Committee to
allow these symbols was
--
which is not of course used
On 15/05/2011 22:28, B. Scott Michel wrote:
Cores don't necessarily help linking because it's I/O bound and very concrete
sequential algo.
It's CPU-bound on my machine. ld uses 100% of one core with occasional disk activity. Pity that the other cores can't
help, linking often seems like the
If only 1% of an imported module is used, GHC will link in the entire module. Are there any plans, or at least some
ideas, to rectify this? One severe example of this is qtHaskell, where importing the top-level module causes glacial
compile (actually link) times and huge executables. Strip can
On 14/05/2011 21:12, Don Stewart wrote:
When compiled with split objs GHC makes it possible for the linker
to do dead code stripping. Make sure your GHC has split-objs on.
Thank you, I hadn't realised that the imported library could be built like this. How is this configured with cabal? (And
On 14/05/2011 21:10, Daniel Fischer wrote:
Linking still tends to use a lot of memory with ld, on the appropriate
platforms you could try using gold as the linker, that's reported to use
less memory (and be faster).
No gold for windows :-( Another problem with ld is that it's only single core.
On 14/05/2011 21:12, Don Stewart wrote:
When compiled with split objs GHC makes it possible for the linker
to do dead code stripping. Make sure your GHC has split-objs on.
In the case that split-objs wasn't used, is this a GHC limitation, or an ld limitation? The Delphi linker eliminates
2007/11/20, Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Martin Guy wrote:
$ .../ghc6-6.6.1/testsuite/tests/ghc-regress$ make stage=2 fast
make-fast-stage=2.errs 21
Wrong exit code (expected 0 , actual 2 )
/tmp/ghc27396_0/ghc27396_0.hc:5:27:
error: TestStub_stub.h: No such file or directory
Hi
I just ported ghc-6.6.1 to the new Debian port for ARM EABI and all
seems to have gone well, but I am mystified by two failing tests when
I run the testsuite:
$ .../ghc6-6.6.1/testsuite/tests/ghc-regress$ make stage=2 fast
make-fast-stage=2.errs 21
I get 7 internal error: adjustor creation
On Thu, 2002-07-25 at 19:07, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
G'day all.
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 01:27:48AM +, Karen Y wrote:
1. How would I convert capital letters into small letters?
2. How would I remove vowels from a string?
As you've probably found out, these are very hard problems.
ndentation
that people normally produce are very similar under both rules.
Guy Lapalme
Université de Montréal
PS: as a Quiz, can you guess how in Haskell the following is interpreted?
f x = 1 + x
g y = 1 + y
NEW BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT
ALGORITHMS : A FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMMING APPROACH
by Fethi Rabhi and Guy Lapalme
Addison-Wesley Longman, April 1999 (ISBN : 0-201-59604-0)
Features:
- Primarily an introduction to the design of algorithms
format and modern Linuxes are all ELF. My Linux
expertise certainly isn't up to retrofitting it with a.out.
So has anybody got an ELF binary version of LML for ix86 Linux?
Guy
Guy S., Phil W.,...
I ran into exactly this problem in two different applications.
The first was the same that Guy S. points out, namely adding
arbtrirary but well-typed annotations to a parse-tree. The solution I
eventually ended up using (after
. Cheers, -- P
This looks promising. I'll have to ponder it some.
(Don't worry if you don't hear more from me for a while--
I'm out of town for a couple of weeks soon.)
--Guy
being single items.
Well, I'll manage to hack around it somehow. Thanks for helping!
--Guy
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 14:28:47 GMT
From: wadler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Guy asks the following (non-stupid) Haskell question, which I reply to
below. The question points out an area in the Haskell report that
seems to be unclear; and a place where it might be worthwhile to change
I blew it! My example had a bad flaw. See below.
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 19:30:19 GMT
From: wadler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Guy,
I agree that the report should be updated to express the restriction we
really have in mind. Simon: as editor, this is your bailiwick!
I also think its
31 matches
Mail list logo
