On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 06:01:37PM -0400, Chung-chieh Shan wrote:
> Conal Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in
> gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cafe:
> > I share your perspective, Edsko. If foo and (Let foo id) are
> > indistinguishable to clients of your module and are eq
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 20:59 +0200, Henning Thielemann wrote:
. . .
> Interesting to know what jokes are told about Germans. 8-] So, do English
> professors save their prepositions for the end of a lecture?
This seems peculiarly apropos:
I lately lost a preposition.
It hid, I thought, b
On 2008 May 14, at 22:57, Derek Elkins wrote:
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 14:40 +1200, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
I suspect that "λ is the lambda-symbol iff it is not preceded by any
identifier character and is not followed by a Greek letter" might
work.
λω. ...
λα. ...
λδ ε. ...
Come to think
Claus Reinke wrote:
Germans have no problems with sentences which though started at
the beginning when observed closely and in the light of day (none of
which adds anything to the content of the sentence in which the very
parenthetical remark you -dear reader- are reading at this very moment
whil
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 14:40 +1200, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
> On 15 May 2008, at 2:34 pm, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
> > Hm. Newer Unicode standard than the version supported by OSX and
> > GNOME, I take it? That's not so helpful if nobody actually supports
> > the characters in questio
On 2008 May 14, at 22:40, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
I still suspect it would not be outside the pale to make λ a
keyword. We already have several, after all.
I'd rather not have to write \x as λ x with a space required after
the λ.
I suspect that "λ is the lambda-symbol iff it is not pre
On 15 May 2008, at 2:34 pm, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
Hm. Newer Unicode standard than the version supported by OSX and
GNOME, I take it? That's not so helpful if nobody actually supports
the characters in question. (My Mac claims 166CC is in an
unassigned area, and no supplied font
On 2008 May 14, at 22:23, Patrick Surry wrote:
So maybe what I really want is to essentially write my source in
(la)tex
and be able to both compile and render to dvi at the same time? I
suppose word's crazy equation editor or mathml is another option but
it
makes the source itself either
On 2008 May 14, at 22:07, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
On 15 May 2008, at 7:19 am, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
Unfortunately, while I thought there was a distinct lambda sign
that wasn't the lowercase Greek letter, there isn't. (That said, I
don't see why it couldn't be a keyword. You'd
Sorry, missed a mail digest: LyX and lhs2tex sound more like what I
mean.
Patrick
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Surry
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:24 PM
To: 'haskell-cafe@haskell.org'
Subject: Re: Richer (than ascii) notation for haskell source?
Lots of folk have suggested writin
Lots of folk have suggested writing code with Unicode symbols, but that
doesn't really get me where I'm thinking of. Back in the day, I spent
many happy hours writing math(s) in amstex style, peppered with latex
backslash references/macros for greek symbols, set operators as well as
character attr
Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
At least to give editors a fighting chance of matching their concept of a
"word" with Haskell tokens, it might be better to use nabla instead of
lambda. Other old APL fans may understand why (:-). Alternatively, didn't
Church really want to use a character rather like
On 15 May 2008, at 7:19 am, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
Unfortunately, while I thought there was a distinct lambda sign that
wasn't the lowercase Greek letter, there isn't. (That said, I don't
see why it couldn't be a keyword. You'd need a space after it.)
There are three lambda letter
> So I've always wondered, if you are writing down a number being dictated
> (slowly) by someone else, like 234, do you write the 2, then leave space and
> write the 4, then go back and fill in with 3? Or do you push the 4 onto the
> stack until the 3 arrives, and write 34 at once.
My German profe
On 14 May 2008, at 2:13 PM, Claus Reinke wrote:
It's not that simple with bits. They lack consistency just
like the
usual US date format and the way Germans read numbers.
So you claim that you pronounce 14 tenty-four? In German
pronunciation
is completely uniform from 13 to 99.
http://w
derek.a.elkins:
> On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 19:30 -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
> > > I offer up the following example:
> > >
> > > mean xs = sum xs / length xs
> > >
> > > Now try, say, "mean [1.. 1e9]", and watch GHC eat several GB of RAM. (!!)
> >
> > But you know why, don't you?
> >
> > > sat down
On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 19:30 -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
> > I offer up the following example:
> >
> > mean xs = sum xs / length xs
> >
> > Now try, say, "mean [1.. 1e9]", and watch GHC eat several GB of RAM. (!!)
>
> But you know why, don't you?
>
> > sat down and spent the best part of a day wri
2008/5/15 Claus Reinke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Feel free to CC me or the ticket with things like that. I'll be
> IMHO, trying to support a semantics- and comment-preserving
> roundtrip in (pretty . parse) would be a good way to start (David
> says he's going to look at the extracting comments/p
Ronald Guida wrote:
I have read that Monad is stronger than Idiom because Monad lets me
use the results of a computation to choose between the side effects of
alternative future computations, while Idiom does not have this
feature. Arrow does not have this feature either.
ArrowChoice has the fe
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 12:42 -0700, Dan Piponi wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Andrew Coppin
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "It is well-known that trees with substitution form a monad."
>
> Now that's funny. Compare with the first line of this paper:
> http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/51
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> use stdcall instead of ccall in Haskell too. afair, depending on
> calling conventions, different prefixes/suffixes are used when
> translating C function name into assembler (dll) name
>
Oops, sorry I copied the wrong
Conal Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in
gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cafe:
> I share your perspective, Edsko. If foo and (Let foo id) are
> indistinguishable to clients of your module and are equal with respect to
> your intended semantics of Exp, then I'd say at leas
I have read that Monad is stronger than Idiom because Monad lets me
use the results of a computation to choose between the side effects of
alternative future computations, while Idiom does not have this
feature. Arrow does not have this feature either.
ArrowChoice has the feature that the sum typ
Feel free to CC me or the ticket with things like that. I'll be
working on this for this year's GSoC and it'd be helpful to find out
what I should tackle first.
Hi Thomas,
thanks, I was wondering about your project. Is there a project
page documenting the issues/tickets you look at, and partic
Hello Olivier,
Thursday, May 15, 2008, 1:26:28 AM, you wrote:
> RFC_RC _stdcall RfcUTF8ToSAPUC(const RFC_BYTE *utf8, unsigned
> utf8Length, SAP_UC *sapuc,
> unsigned *sapucSize, unsigned *resultLength, RFC_ERROR_INFO *info)
> foreign import ccall unsafe "sapnwrfc.h RfcUTF8ToSAPUC
Dan,
Let me first apologize for this late reply.
Neil pointed you to
Jurriaan Hage and Stefan Holdermans. Heap recycling for lazy
languages. In John Hatcliff, Robert Glück, and Oege de Moor, editors,
_Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Partial Evaluation
and Semantics-Based Progr
Hi all,
I'm trying to call the following C function.
RFC_RC _stdcall RfcUTF8ToSAPUC(const RFC_BYTE *utf8, unsigned
utf8Length, SAP_UC *sapuc,
unsigned *sapucSize, unsigned *resultLength, RFC_ERROR_INFO *info)
I wrote a foreign import for this function:
foreign import ccall unsafe
Hi,
> {-# LANGUAGE ExistentialQuantification, ScopedTypeVariables #-}
Following the related discussion on #haskell, I ended up writing the below
code (thanks to the suggestions). This is for a genetic programming
library, but the usage would be similar. It also (de)serializes
TypeRep.
I'm a has
It's not that simple with bits. They lack consistency just like the
usual US date format and the way Germans read numbers.
So you claim that you pronounce 14 tenty-four? In German pronunciation
is completely uniform from 13 to 99.
http://www.verein-zwanzigeins.de/
So I've always wondered, i
Henning Thielemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course, we write down 243, realize the mistake and rewrite the
> number. :-) Actually, many pupils have problems with the mixed order
> of digits and give solutions like this one in examinations:
>8 * 8 = 46
> because they write the digits a
Hello Andrew,
Thursday, May 15, 2008, 12:49:32 AM, you wrote:
> touch. Now, let's see what this IDE actually looks li-- oh you have GOT
> to be KIDDING me! It can't find the right GTK DLL?!?
gtk2hs includes *developer* gtk2 environment. while it should work
fine (as far as it's in your path), yo
David Roundy wrote:
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 08:37:53PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Andrew Coppin wrote:
I've recently reinstalled Windows, so I decided to go download the
latest Darcs and set that up. Now it's complaining that I don't have
curl or wget. (Never used to do that before.)
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 08:37:53PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
> Andrew Coppin wrote:
> >Henning Thielemann wrote:
> >>
> >>As said, the IDE Leksah can display code exactly like this ...
> >>
> >
> >I noticed the first time. Clearly this is another toy I'm going to
> >have to try out sometime...
>
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Andrew Coppin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "It is well-known that trees with substitution form a monad."
Now that's funny. Compare with the first line of this paper:
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/510658.html
Anyway, I worked through an elementary example of this w
On 2008 May 14, at 15:00, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On 2008 May 14, at 14:32, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Personally, I'd just like to be able to get rid of "->", "\" and
other such hacks. Would it be possible to amend GHC so that it
accepts "->" and [whatever the Unico
Andrew Coppin wrote:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
As said, the IDE Leksah can display code exactly like this ...
I noticed the first time. Clearly this is another toy I'm going to
have to try out sometime...
...and then he discovers that Darcs isn't working any more. :-(
I've recently reins
On 2008 May 14, at 15:00, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On 2008 May 14, at 14:32, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Personally, I'd just like to be able to get rid of "->", "\" and
other such hacks. Would it be possible to amend GHC so that it
accepts "->" and [whatever the Uni
Hi
Bjorn Bringert wrote:
> Mads: Preparing the statement and asking the DB about the type at
> compile is a great idea! I've never thought of that. Please consider
> completing this and packaging it as a library.
Thanks for the nice remark. And I will begin completing the idea, as
soon I have pa
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Personally, I'd just like to be able to get rid of "->", "\" and
other such hacks. Would it be possible to amend GHC so that it
accepts "->" and [whatever the Unicode codepoint for "left arrow" is]
and treats both the same?
Janis Voigtlaender wrote:
http://wwwtcs.inf.tu-dresden.de/~voigt/mpc08.pdf
"It is well-known that trees with substitution form a monad."
...OK, I just learned something new. Hanging around Haskell Cafe can be
so illuminating! :-)
Now, if only I could actually comprehend the rest of the pape
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Personally, I'd just like to be able to get rid of "->", "\" and other such
hacks. Would it be possible to amend GHC so that it accepts "->" and
[whatever the Unicode codepoint for "left arrow" is] and treats both the
same?
As said, the IDE Leksah c
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On 2008 May 14, at 14:32, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Personally, I'd just like to be able to get rid of "->", "\" and
other such hacks. Would it be possible to amend GHC so that it
accepts "->" and [whatever the Unicode codepoint for "left arrow" is]
and treats both
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On 2008 May 14, at 14:34, Dan Weston wrote:
So I've always wondered, if you are writing down a number being dictated
(slowly) by someone else, like 234, do you write the 2, then leave space
and write the 4, then go back and fill in with 3
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Dan Weston wrote:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
http://www.verein-zwanzigeins.de/
So I've always wondered, if you are writing down a number being dictated
(slowly) by someone else, like 234, do you write the 2, then leave space and
write the 4, then go back and fill in wi
Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:
If you worry that the sum thread and the length thread are not
synchronized and therefore there is still no bound on the list prefix
kept in memory, I'm sure you can improve it by one of the chunking
strategies.
I'm more worried that data now has to go through tiny CPU
Reinier Lamers wrote:
Op 14-mei-2008, om 20:32 heeft Andrew Coppin het volgende geschreven:
Personally, I'd just like to be able to get rid of "->", "\" and
other such hacks. Would it be possible to amend GHC so that it
accepts "->" and [whatever the Unicode codepoint for "left arrow" is]
and
Paul Johnson wrote:
The solution is for the programmer to rewrite "mean" to accumulate a
pair containing the running total and count together, then do the
division. This makes me wonder: could there be a compiler optimisation
rule for this, collapsing two iterations over a list into one.
Do
On 2008 May 14, at 14:34, Dan Weston wrote:
So I've always wondered, if you are writing down a number being
dictated (slowly) by someone else, like 234, do you write the 2,
then leave space and write the 4, then go back and fill in with 3?
Or do you push the 4 onto the stack until the 3 ar
On 2008 May 14, at 14:32, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Personally, I'd just like to be able to get rid of "->", "\" and
other such hacks. Would it be possible to amend GHC so that it
accepts "->" and [whatever the Unicode codepoint for "left arrow"
is] and treats both the same?
Both of those ar
Don Stewart wrote:
You'd want a general fusion framework for this, and other accumulators,
that's let's you treat 'f' as a zip of some kind that pulls items from
its two arguments. And then require only a single rewrite rule for all
your loop forms.
Stream fusion (see "Lists to Streams to Nothin
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Tue, 13 May 2008, Achim Schneider wrote:
Jed Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not that simple with bits. They lack consistency just like the
usual US date format and the way Germans read numbers.
So you claim that you pronounce 14 tenty-four? In German pr
Patrick Surry wrote:
Probably a silly question, but for me one of the nice things about
Haskell is that it's a lot like just writing math(s). But in contrast
to math you lose a lot of notational flexibility being limited to the
ascii character set in your source code.
It would be nice to be
On 2008 May 14, at 14:23, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Neil Mitchell wrote:
1. What is "ghc-core"?
You actually answer this question as part of question 2. Think of it
as simple Haskell with some additional bits.
I rephrase: I know what GHC's Core language is. But Dons said "I
suggest you insta
Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
On 14 May 2008, at 8:58 am, Andrew Coppin wrote:
What I'm trying to say [and saying very badly] is that Haskell is an
almost terrifyingly subtle language.
Name me a useful programming language that isn't.
Simply interchanging two for-loops, from
for (i = 0; i < N
andrewcoppin:
> Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
> >
> >On 2008 May 13, at 17:01, Andrew Coppin wrote:
> >
> >>That definition of mean is wrong because it traverses the list twice.
> >>(Curiosity: would traversing it twice in parallel work any better?)
> >>As for the folds - I always *always* mix
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On 2008 May 13, at 17:12, Andrew Coppin wrote:
[Oh GOD I hope I didn't just start a Holy War...]
Er, I'd say it's already well in progress. :/
Oh dear.
Appologies to everybody who doesn't actually _care_ about which endian
mode their computer uses...
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On 2008 May 13, at 17:01, Andrew Coppin wrote:
That definition of mean is wrong because it traverses the list twice.
(Curiosity: would traversing it twice in parallel work any better?)
As for the folds - I always *always* mix up
It might work "better" but you
Neil Mitchell wrote:
Hi
1. What is "ghc-core"?
You actually answer this question as part of question 2. Think of it
as simple Haskell with some additional bits.
I rephrase: I know what GHC's Core language is. But Dons said "I suggest
you install ghc-core", which suggests the ex
Don Stewart wrote:
ndmitchell:
2. Does anybody know how to actually read GHC's Core output anyway?
There is one different from standard Haskell I am aware of. In Core,
case x of _ -> 1 will evaluate x, in Haskell it won't. Other than
that, its just Haskell, but without pattern matchi
David Menendez wrote:
> To summarize: some applicative functors are commutative, some
> applicative functors are monads, and the ones that are both are
> commutative monads.
OK, so commutativity is orthogonal to "idiom vs monad". Commutativity
depends on whether or not the order of side effects i
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Paul Johnson wrote:
We've had a big debate over
mean xs = foldl' (+) 0 xs / fromIntegral (length xs)
For anyone who didn't follow it, the problem is that "mean" needs to traverse
its argument twice, so the entire list has to be held in memory. So if "xs =
[1..100
paul:
> We've had a big debate over
>
> > mean xs = foldl' (+) 0 xs / fromIntegral (length xs)
>
> For anyone who didn't follow it, the problem is that "mean" needs to
> traverse its argument twice, so the entire list has to be held in
> memory. So if "xs = [1..10]" then "mean xs" uses
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Op 14-mei-2008, om 15:43 heeft Patrick Surry het volgende geschreven:
It would be nice to be able to use a richer set of symbols in your
source code for operators and functions (e.g. integral, sum, dot
and cross-product, …), as well as variables
We've had a big debate over
> mean xs = foldl' (+) 0 xs / fromIntegral (length xs)
For anyone who didn't follow it, the problem is that "mean" needs to
traverse its argument twice, so the entire list has to be held in
memory. So if "xs = [1..10]" then "mean xs" uses all your
memory,
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Ronald Guida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a few questions about commutative monads and applicative functors.
>
> >From what I have read about applicative functors, they are weaker than
> monads because with a monad, I can use the results of a computation to
I share your perspective, Edsko. If foo and (Let foo id) are
indistinguishable to clients of your module and are equal with respect to
your intended semantics of Exp, then I'd say at least this one monad law
holds. - Conal
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 7:59 AM, Edsko de Vries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
Am Mittwoch, 14. Mai 2008 17:47 schrieb Mike Jarmy:
> Newbie question: Given a list of type '[FilePath]', how do I create a list
> of all those directories which do not actually exist, and then print the
> list? I've figured out how to extract the ones which *do* exist, like so:
>
> module Main w
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Mike Jarmy wrote:
Newbie question: Given a list of type '[FilePath]', how do I create a list
of all those directories which do not actually exist, and then print the
list? I've figured out how to extract the ones which *do* exist, like so:
module Main where
import Contr
Newbie question: Given a list of type '[FilePath]', how do I create a list
of all those directories which do not actually exist, and then print the
list? I've figured out how to extract the ones which *do* exist, like so:
module Main where
import Control.Monad (filterM)
import System.Directory
Henning Thielemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 May 2008, Achim Schneider wrote:
>
> > Jed Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> It's not that simple with bits. They lack consistency just like
> >> the usual US date format and the way Germans read numbers.
> >>
> > So you claim
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 03:59:23PM +0100, Edsko de Vries wrote:
> You mention that a "direct" implementation of what I suggested would
> break the monad laws, as (foo) and (Let foo id) are not equal. But one
> might argue that they are in fact, in a sense, equivalent. Do you reckon
> that if it is
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Patrick Surry wrote:
Probably a silly question, but for me one of the nice things about
Haskell is that it's a lot like just writing math(s). But in contrast
to math you lose a lot of notational flexibility being limited to the
ascii character set in your source code.
Le
Hi,
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 03:59:58PM +0300, Lauri Alanko wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 10:11:17AM +0100, Edsko de Vries wrote:
> > Suppose we have some data structure that uses HOAS; typically, a DSL
> > with explicit sharing. For example:
> >
> > > data Expr = One | Add Expr Expr | Let Expr
Hi
> It would be nice to be able to use a richer set of symbols in your source
> code for operators and functions (e.g. integral, sum, dot and cross-product,
> …), as well as variables (the standard upper and lower-case greek for
> example, along with things like super- and sub-scripting, bold/it
On Tue, 13 May 2008, Achim Schneider wrote:
Jed Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not that simple with bits. They lack consistency just like the
usual US date format and the way Germans read numbers.
So you claim that you pronounce 14 tenty-four? In German pronunciation
is completely u
Patrick Surry on 2008-05-14 09:43:44 -0400:
> Probably a silly question, but for me one of the nice things about
> Haskell is that it's a lot like just writing math(s). But in contrast
> to math you lose a lot of notational flexibility being limited to the
> ascii character set in your source cod
"Patrick Surry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Probably a silly question, but for me one of the nice things about
> Haskell is that it's a lot like just writing math(s). But in contrast
> to math you lose a lot of notational flexibility being limited to the
> ascii character set in your source code
PR Stanley wrote:
Paul: What is the underlying rationale for the Maybe data type?
It is the equivalent of a database field that can be NULL.
Paul: shock, horror! the null value or the absence of any value
denoted by null is not really in harmony with the relational model.
Hello Patrick,
Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 5:43:44 PM, you wrote:
> It would be nice to be able to use a richer set of symbols in your
ghc supports UTF-8 encoded haskell sources and there are lots of utf-8
enabled editors available
--
Best regards,
Bulatmailto:[EMAIL
Probably a silly question, but for me one of the nice things about
Haskell is that it's a lot like just writing math(s). But in contrast
to math you lose a lot of notational flexibility being limited to the
ascii character set in your source code.
It would be nice to be able to use a richer
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 10:11:17AM +0100, Edsko de Vries wrote:
> Suppose we have some data structure that uses HOAS; typically, a DSL
> with explicit sharing. For example:
>
> > data Expr = One | Add Expr Expr | Let Expr (Expr -> Expr)
>
> When I use such a data structure, I find myself writing
Ronald Guida wrote:
From what I have read about applicative functors, they are weaker than
monads because with a monad, I can use the results of a computation to
select between alternative future computations and their side effects,
whereas with an applicative functor, I can only select between t
Thanks for your detailed input -- I appreciate seeing these rather
abstract techniques being applied to specific problems.
Tom Nielsen pointed me in the direction of the solution you've
supplied, so I should have replied to the list that my question had
been addressed. Anyhow, I now have code tha
Hi,
Suppose we have some data structure that uses HOAS; typically, a DSL
with explicit sharing. For example:
> data Expr = One | Add Expr Expr | Let Expr (Expr -> Expr)
When I use such a data structure, I find myself writing expressions such
as
> Let foo $ \a ->
> Let bar $ \b ->
> Add a b
It
Hello,
On 14 May 2008, at 02:06, Ronald Guida wrote:
I have a few questions about commutative monads and applicative
functors.
From what I have read about applicative functors, they are weaker
than
monads because with a monad, I can use the results of a computation to
select between alte
85 matches
Mail list logo
