David F. Place [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was hoping that the examples I requested would be examples of
particular control constructs or extensions to the language's syntax
and semantics. Though I admit that such things are possible in lisp,
I suspect that their utility is minimal.
Ever heard
Does anyone know of a prover / proof assistant / proof verifier which uses a
vaguely Haskell-like syntax? That is to say, it allows you to express
theorems in Haskell-style syntax, print proof steps in Haskell-style syntax,
etc.
--
Robin
___
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 08:53:47AM +0100, Immanuel Litzroth wrote:
David F. Place [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was hoping that the examples I requested would be examples of
particular control constructs or extensions to the language's syntax
and semantics. Though I admit that such things are
On 9/21/05, Robin Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone know of a prover / proof assistant / proof verifier which uses a
vaguely Haskell-like syntax? That is to say, it allows you to express
theorems in Haskell-style syntax, print proof steps in Haskell-style syntax,
etc.
Skimming
maybe, i completely missunderstand you. please, could you program your example
in another language than haskell, one you know better?
i'm not sure -- did you try to define variables instead of types?
data Employee = Emp
data Department = Dept
translated to c++ this means sth like
typedef void
Bill Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The variable mem is a so-called hybrid variable; it crunches
together 2 different concepts: a boolean value (could I allocate
memory?) and an address value (what is the address where I can find
my allocated memory).
IMO, Maybe is exactly the oppsite, it
Karl Grapone [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've just started learning Haskell, and I must admit I'm finding it a
bit hard to get my head around the typing system...
Okay.
What I want to be able to do is add and remove fields while the system
is running,
While I'm sure you'll get some advanced
Tomasz Zielonka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 08:53:47AM +0100, Immanuel Litzroth wrote:
David F. Place [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was hoping that the examples I requested would be examples of
particular control constructs or extensions to the language's syntax
and
David F. Place wrote:
I don't deny that all of the things you mentioned are wonderful
indeed. I just wonder if they really could only be done in lisp or
even most conveniently.
Obviously, if you can do it in Lisp, you can do it in any
Turing-complete language; in the worst case, you
On Sep 21, 2005, at 3:53 AM, Immanuel Litzroth wrote:
Ever heard of the loop macro?
Yes, the loop macro is a good example for the argument against lisp.
Lisp has features to support iteration that date back to the time
before it was understood that tail recursion is equivalent to
Robin Green schrieb:
Does anyone know of a prover / proof assistant / proof verifier which uses a
vaguely Haskell-like syntax? That is to say, it allows you to express
theorems in Haskell-style syntax, print proof steps in Haskell-style syntax,
etc.
Hi Robin,
As part of a seminar, I'm
On 16 September 2005 20:42, S. Alexander Jacobson wrote:
If I am running a server interactively. (using ghci).
Is there any way to kill its running threads without terminating the
interpreter?
If you can get ThreadIds for the threads, yes. GHCi doesn't (currently)
create a new thread for
David F. Place [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sep 21, 2005, at 3:53 AM, Immanuel Litzroth wrote:
Ever heard of the loop macro?
Yes, the loop macro is a good example for the argument against lisp.
Lisp has features to support iteration that date back to the time
before it was understood that
On Sep 20, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 16:50, John Goerzen wrote:
On the flip side, Parsec is really nice. I wonder how easy it would
be to make it parse [Word8] instead of String?
Isn't Parsec parameterized over the token type?
Or even a
On Wednesday 21 September 2005 19:36, Jan-Willem Maessen wrote:
On Sep 20, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 16:50, John Goerzen wrote:
On the flip side, Parsec is really nice. I wonder how easy it
would be to make it parse [Word8] instead of String?
I'm trying to define a type called Stream. For now, assume that that the
type has
3 fields: uid, x, y. X and y represent a point in space that a stream
occupies, and
uid is a unique identifier for the stream. The uid should be
auto-generated. It's
important that streams have an identity so
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 12:32:56AM +0200, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 16:50, John Goerzen wrote:
On the flip side, Parsec is really nice. I wonder how easy it would
be to make it parse [Word8] instead of String?
Isn't Parsec parameterized over the token type?
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Mark Carter wrote:
I get the idea that
data SM a = SM (S - (a,S))
maps a state to a result, and a new state. OTOH, looking at
instance Monad SM where
-- defines state propagation
SM c1 = fc2 = SM (\s0 - let (r,s1) = c1 s0
SM
On Wednesday 21 September 2005 20:17, John Meacham wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 12:32:56AM +0200, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 16:50, John Goerzen wrote:
On the flip side, Parsec is really nice. I wonder how easy it
would be to make it parse [Word8] instead of
Is the general pattern to write all threadIds to a file, and then have
a separate function that takes the file and kills them?
Or is there something more clever?
-Alex-
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 16 September 2005 20:42, S. Alexander Jacobson wrote:
If I am running a
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 12:12:16PM +0100, Immanuel Litzroth wrote:
Tomasz Zielonka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 08:53:47AM +0100, Immanuel Litzroth wrote:
David F. Place [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was hoping that the examples I requested would be examples of
21 matches
Mail list logo
