Re: Unicode support

2001-10-09 Thread Ketil Malde
[Posted to haskell-cafe, since it's getting quite off topic] "Kent Karlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> for a long time. 16 bit unicode should be gotten rid of, being the worst >>> of both worlds, non backwards compatable with ascii, endianness issues >>> and no constant length encoding...

Re: Unicode support

2001-10-09 Thread Kent Karlsson
- Original Message - From: "Ketil Malde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... > >>> for a long time. 16 bit unicode should be gotten rid of, being the worst > >>> of both worlds, non backwards compatable with ascii, endianness issues > >>> and no constant length encoding utf8 externally and utf32

Re: Unicode support

2001-10-09 Thread Ketil Malde
"Kent Karlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> You have endianness issues, and you need to explicitly type text files >> or insert BOMs. > You have to distinguish between the encoding form (what you use internally) > and encoding scheme (externally). Good point, of course. Most of the argume

Re: Reasons behind the "one instance per type" limitation

2001-10-09 Thread Diego Dainese
On Mon, 8 Oct 2001 15:03:15 -0700 Ashley Yakeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 2001-10-08 09:27, Diego Dainese wrote: > > >what are the reasons behind the rule stating that a type must not be > >declared as an instance of a particular class, more than once in the > >program? > > It's so that t

Re: Reasons behind the "one instance per type" limitation

2001-10-09 Thread Iavor S. Diatchki
hello, > Why aren't instance declarations handled by the module system like > every other symbol, so that a module can decide when to import an > instance declaration and when to export it? Are there technical > difficulties with this approach? i beleive the reason is that instances don't have

= vs ->

2001-10-09 Thread Mark Carroll
What is the rationale for when Haskell demands a "=" and when it demands a "->"? Ideas that occur to me are: (a) The distinction helps the parser a lot (b) There's a semantic difference that the language's grammar is trying to express that isn't obvious to me -- Mark ___

RE: Unicode support

2001-10-09 Thread Karlsson Kent - keka
Title: RE: Unicode support > -Original Message- > From: Ketil Malde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] ... > > But as I said: they will not go away now, they are too > firmly established. > > Yep.  But it appears that the "right" choice for external encoding > scheme would be UTF-8. You'r

SuSE 7.3

2001-10-09 Thread Jorge Adriano
Está para sair a 22 de Outubro... até eu estou a ficar surpreendido com a evolução destes tipos. Qd penso do 1o Linux que instalei (à cerca de dois anos? - andava eu no 4o ano) sinto-me como aquelas velhas que dizem "eu ainda sou do tempo...", err... em que tinha de andar a alterar XF86Config à

Opsss... Sorry (SuSE 7.3)

2001-10-09 Thread Jorge Adriano
I just accidently sent a mail written in portuguese about SuSE 7.3. I'm really sorry, it will not happen again. My apologies J.A. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Re: Reasons behind the "one instance per type" limitation

2001-10-09 Thread Brian Boutel
"Iavor S. Diatchki" wrote: > > hello, > > > Why aren't instance declarations handled by the module system like > > every other symbol, so that a module can decide when to import an > > instance declaration and when to export it? Are there technical > > difficulties with this approach? > > i b

Re: = vs ->

2001-10-09 Thread Ashley Yakeley
At 2001-10-09 11:55, Mark Carroll wrote: >What is the rationale for when Haskell demands a "=" and when it demands >a "->"? What? Example please... -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.or

Re: = vs ->

2001-10-09 Thread Mark Carroll
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Ashley Yakeley wrote: > At 2001-10-09 11:55, Mark Carroll wrote: > > >What is the rationale for when Haskell demands a "=" and when it demands > >a "->"? > > What? Example please... e.g. x :: Integer -> Integer y :: Integer -> Integer z :: Integer -> Integer x 1 = 1 x 2

Re: = vs ->

2001-10-09 Thread Ketil Malde
Mark Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Ashley Yakeley wrote: >> At 2001-10-09 11:55, Mark Carroll wrote: >>> What is the rationale for when Haskell demands a "=" and when it >>> demands a "->"? Okay, I can't give you anything formal, but here's my intuitive understandin

Re: = vs ->

2001-10-09 Thread Ashley Yakeley
At 2001-10-09 17:36, Mark Carroll wrote: >So, for instance, how come function definitions and guards use "=" but >lambdas and cases use "->"? It's like this: f x = fx f = \x -> fx f :: X -> FX f x = case x of x' -> fx' x'' -> fx'' Make sense? -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA __

Re: = vs ->

2001-10-09 Thread D. Tweed
On 10 Oct 2001, Ketil Malde wrote: > Mark Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Ashley Yakeley wrote: > > >> At 2001-10-09 11:55, Mark Carroll wrote: > > >>> What is the rationale for when Haskell demands a "=" and when it > >>> demands a "->"? > > Okay, I can't give y

Re: = vs ->

2001-10-09 Thread D. Tweed
On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, D. Tweed wrote: > degenerate equality you get from defining the lhs in terms of the rhs. The > -> is used whenever you've got something on the right that `leads to' to ^left > something on the left, eg