1 & 2 -
Maybe this is not a proper question but I think It has a point. Why
Not Compiling To Java Or C#? What is the need of implementing a class
interoperability between Haskell and other plateforms? Maybe we donot
need that. Haskell can be the big infrastructure and code snippets in
Java or C# c
I do not meant to compile Haskell to MSIL/JVM. I meant to compile
Haskell to the Java or C# itself! And GHC will be there for a high
performance language (but still O'Caml is better by the time). But
Java proves that in enterprise solution, performance is a complex
factor of many thing other than
> A value of any type should be embeddable inside a build expression
> of any result type, i.e. a -> b or b -> a cannot hold on Embed in
> general.
It seems you might benefit from local functional dependencies, which
are asserted per instance rather than for the whole class. They are
explained in
Yes, this will surely do the trick, thanks a lot! :-)
I got as far as defining a TypeEq class myself in one of my attempts,
trying to trick the inference engine, but now seeing the full
ingenuity of the TypeCast class I realize how far from the solution I
really was. Again, thanks a million!
/Ni
Kaveh Shahbazian wrote:
Thanks All
This is about my tries to understand monads and handling state - as
you perfectly know - is one of them. I have understood a little about
monads but that knowledge does not satidfy me. Again Thankyou
There are many tutorials available from the wiki at
http://w
Brian Hulley wrote:
q >>= (\x -> p)
For example with the State monad, (q) must be some expression which
evaluates to something of the form S fq where fq is a function with
type s -> (a,s), and similarly, (\x -> p) must have type a ->S ( s ->
(a,s)). If we choose names for these values which de
On 05/08/06, Kaveh Shahbazian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But there must be a way to populize Haskell!
What for?
Regards,
Piotr Kalinowski
--
Intelligence is like a river: the deeper it is, the less noise it makes
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskel
Very Thankyou
I am starting to feel it. I think about it as a 'context' that wraps
some computations, which are handled by compiler environment (please
make me correct if I am wrong). Now I think I need to find out how
this 'monads' fit in solving problems. And for that I must go through
bigger pr
On Aug 4, 2006, at 11:10 PM, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Friday, August 4, 2006, 8:17:42 PM, you wrote:
1) Haskell is too slow for practical use, but the benchmarks I found
appear to contradict this.
it's an advertisement :D just check yourself
2) Input and output are not good enough, in parti
Kaveh Shahbazian wrote:
Very Thankyou
I am starting to feel it. I think about it as a 'context' that wraps
some computations, which are handled by compiler environment (please
make me correct if I am wrong). Now I think I need to find out how
this 'monads' fit in solving problems. And for that I
On 8/5/06, Piotr Kalinowski wrote:
On 05/08/06, Kaveh Shahbazian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> But there must be a way to populize Haskell!What for?Because we are humans and as such, we generally love to share our passions with other people.
From a less sociological standpoint, a larger user base imp
Hello Chris,
Saturday, August 5, 2006, 3:47:19 AM, you wrote:
>> in Haskell before blitting the data (whilst also retaining some
>> semblance of functional programming...)
the best way to optimize Haskell program (with current technologies)
is to rewrite it in strict & imperative manner:
>> cam
On 05/08/06, Chris Kuklewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I suggest trying something, using "/usr/bin/ghc -O3 -optc-O3" like this:
> {-# OPTIONS_GHC -funbox-strict-fields #-}
>
> import Foreign
> import Control.Monad
>
> data Cam = Cam { snap_width :: !Int
>, snap_height :: !Int
Hello Antonio,
Saturday, August 5, 2006, 7:07:17 PM, you wrote:
>>> But there must be a way to populize Haskell!
>> What for?
> On the other hand, individuals that need to belong to an elite, and
> the RTFM crowd, will experience a further frustration to feed their insecure
> personality.
the
Hello Kaveh,
Saturday, August 5, 2006, 11:52:16 AM, you wrote:
> I do not meant to compile Haskell to MSIL/JVM. I meant to compile
> Haskell to the Java or C# itself!
for what? btw, there is a jhc compiler (http://repetae.net/john/) that
translates Haskell to ANSI C which allows to reach OCaml-l
Hello Kaveh,
Saturday, August 5, 2006, 10:16:06 AM, you wrote:
> 1 - monads : there must be something to make a clear tool for a
> none-mathematician programmer. (I still have understanding problems
> with them).
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/IO_inside and "All about monads"
> 2 - there must b
Hello Bjorn,
Saturday, August 5, 2006, 6:59:33 PM, you wrote:
yes, thank you
>>> 2) Input and output are not good enough, in particular for graphical
>>> user interfacing and/or data base interaction. But it seems there are
>>> several user interfaces and SQL and other data base interfaces for
>
On 05/08/06, Antonio Cangiano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Because we are humans and as such, we generally love to share our passions
with other people.
From a less sociological standpoint, a larger user base implies faster
development of interesting projects, more libraries, books, user groups,
co
Ooops - more bugs in my explanation...
Brian Hulley wrote:
-- from State.hs
newtype State s a = S (s -> (a,s))
I used the source given in ghc-6.4.2\libraries\monads\Monad\State.hs but the
version of state monad that comes with the hierarchical libs is in
ghc-6.4.2\libraries\mtl\Control\
On 8/5/06, Piotr Kalinowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Yes, yes. I'm simply not sure if making changes only to reach more and> more people is good.These changes are good as long as they possibly add something valuable beside popularity and they don't introduce significant downsides. My point was t
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Brian Hulley wrote:
4) Haskell is open source and licensing restrictions forbid
commercial applications. I haven't seen any such restrictions, but
is this a problem for the standard modules?
You can discover the licensing situation by downloading
bulat.ziganshin:
> Hello Chris,
>
> Saturday, August 5, 2006, 3:47:19 AM, you wrote:
>
> >> in Haskell before blitting the data (whilst also retaining some
> >> semblance of functional programming...)
>
> the best way to optimize Haskell program (with current technologies)
> is to rewrite it in
Thanks, Simon. I've begun putting together some text describing very
simple STRef examples, as Bulat suggested earlier. I think I know how
to make it work, but I'll still need to work on typing subtleties. I'm
headed to bed now, but I'll go through this in detail when I get a
chance to try to get
23 matches
Mail list logo
