Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
On 8/4/05, Till Mossakowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Remi Turk wrote:
MonadState needs multi-parameter type classes, State and StateT
don't. And ST needs rank-2 types (or at least one rank-2
constant) and, to be implemented _efficiently_, also needs
something like
Hello Till,
Friday, August 05, 2005, 10:04:53 AM, you wrote:
TMMonadState IOArray IOArray ST
TMwithwith with
TMFiniteMap unsafePerformIO MutArr
TM safe yesyes no
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello Till,
Friday, August 05, 2005, 10:04:53 AM, you wrote:
TMMonadState IOArray IOArray ST
TMwithwith with
TMFiniteMap unsafePerformIO MutArr
TM safe yes
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 08:04:53AM +0200, Till Mossakowski wrote:
Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
Hmmm... Wasn't that what he said?
I disagree with the equation primitives = unsafe that
is implicit in sentence
to be implemented _efficiently_, also needs
something like unsafePerformIO (or even
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:13:06PM +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello Till,
Friday, August 05, 2005, 10:04:53 AM, you wrote:
TMMonadState IOArray IOArray ST
TMwithwith with
TMFiniteMap
Am Freitag, 5. August 2005 08:04 schrieb Till Mossakowski:
[...]
I disagree with the equation primitives = unsafe that
is implicit in sentence
to be implemented _efficiently_, also needs
something like unsafePerformIO (or even lower-level unsafe
mutable state primitives).
The point
Remi Turk wrote:
Ah, I think I understand what we're disagreeing about exactly
now. We're understanding primitive to mean different things :)
You're seeing runST, newSTRef, writeSTRef etc as primitives, is
that correct? I see them as the public interface to something
which is implemented in
On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 12:07 -0500, Srinivas Nedunuri wrote:
I was wondering what advice folks had. In particular, what are the
disadvantages to doing everything in the IO monad - ie why even bother
with the ST monad?
The most obvious disadvantage is that the IO monad has no
Am Mittwoch, 3. August 2005 19:07 schrieb Srinivas Nedunuri:
[...]
I have a bunch of ST code, and then somewhere in there I had the misfortune
of needing to insert a file copy and bam I'm now stuck with the dang IO
monad which goes and infects the entire program.
You can use something like
Am Donnerstag, 4. August 2005 10:21 schrieb Axel Simon:
[...]
Nowadays, you can use one of the MonadState monad
State transformer monads like State and StateT can be implemented without
using special language features. So there was always the opportunity to
implement something like State or
On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 10:58 +0200, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 4. August 2005 10:21 schrieb Axel Simon:
[...]
Nowadays, you can use one of the MonadState monad
State transformer monads like State and StateT can be implemented without
using special language features. So
On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 10:09:06 +0100
Axel Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, granted. In particular I take your point about array accesses.
However, I am not quite convinced that using ST has any advantages over
using IO directly. Of course, one could claim that programmers wants to
protect
Am Donnerstag, 4. August 2005 11:09 schrieben Sie:
On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 10:58 +0200, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 4. August 2005 10:21 schrieb Axel Simon:
[...]
Nowadays, you can use one of the MonadState monad
State transformer monads like State and StateT can be
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 10:09:06AM +0100, Axel Simon wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 10:58 +0200, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 4. August 2005 10:21 schrieb Axel Simon:
[...]
Nowadays, you can use one of the MonadState monad
State transformer monads like State and StateT can
Remi Turk wrote:
MonadState needs multi-parameter type classes, State and StateT
don't. And ST needs rank-2 types (or at least one rank-2
constant) and, to be implemented _efficiently_, also needs
something like unsafePerformIO (or even lower-level unsafe
mutable state primitives).
I think
On 8/4/05, Till Mossakowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Remi Turk wrote:
MonadState needs multi-parameter type classes, State and StateT
don't. And ST needs rank-2 types (or at least one rank-2
constant) and, to be implemented _efficiently_, also needs
something like unsafePerformIO (or even
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 10:40:01PM +0200, Till Mossakowski wrote:
Remi Turk wrote:
MonadState needs multi-parameter type classes, State and StateT
don't. And ST needs rank-2 types (or at least one rank-2
constant) and, to be implemented _efficiently_, also needs
something like unsafePerformIO
Cale Gibbard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, what to do with your computation depends on what that
computation is actually doing. Is the IO really critical to your
algorithm, or can it be done separately? Remember that pure
computation is lazy and so you can save
Glynn Clements [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Srinivas Nedunuri wrote:
Hello, I have some code that manipulates STRefs within the ST monad. All
good and fine, until I come across some computation that uses lets say
IO and everything skids to a halt. At this
Hello,
On 8/3/05, Srinivas Nedunuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The most obvious disadvantage is that the IO monad has no equivalent
of runST.
OK, I'm missing something here. What is the big deal about runST? Can I not
get the IO equivalent by simply running the program at the top level
20 matches
Mail list logo
