On May 27, 2010, at 00:20 , Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On May 26, 2010, at 23:23 , C. McCann wrote:
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Ben Lippmeier
wrote:
While we can all acknowledge the technical impossibility of
identifying the original source language of a piece of code...
Uh,
∀
On May 26, 2010, at 23:23 , C. McCann wrote:
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Ben Lippmeier
wrote:
While we can all acknowledge the technical impossibility of
identifying the original source language of a piece of code...
Uh,
∀p (PieceOfCode(p) -> CanIdentifySourceLanguage(p))
is clearly
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Ben Lippmeier wrote:
>> While we can all acknowledge the technical impossibility of identifying the
>> original source language of a piece of code...
>
>
> Uh,
∀p (PieceOfCode(p) -> CanIdentifySourceLanguage(p))
is clearly false, while
∃p (PieceOfCode(p) -> Ca
Objects in the heap also have a very regular structure. They all have code
pointers as their first word, which point to info tables that also have a
regular structure [1]. GHC produced code is probably one of the easiest to
identify out of all compiled languages...
http://hackage.haskell.org/t
Next up, binary obfuscation! Apple already uses these extensively in their
Fairplay code. Surely it isn't against the rules (yet?) to apply them to
your program before submitting it to the store? :P
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Ben Lippmeier wrote:
>
> On 27/05/2010, at 9:01 AM, Edward Kmet
On 27/05/2010, at 9:01 AM, Edward Kmett wrote:
> While we can all acknowledge the technical impossibility of identifying the
> original source language of a piece of code...
Uh,
desire:tmp benl$ cat Hello.hs
main = putStr "Hello"
desire:tmp benl$ ghc --make Hello.hs
desire:tmp benl$ strings
On 05/26/10 15:42, Carlos Camarao wrote:
What do you think?
I think you are proposing using the current set of instances in scope in
order to remove ambiguity. Am I right? ..I read the haskell-cafe
thread so far, and it looks like I'm right. This is what I'll add to
what's been said so fa
Hi, I have met similar problem before, and I do not know what to do.
# cabal install --reinstall gtk2hs-buildtools
Resolving dependencies...
Configuring gtk2hs-buildtools-0.9...
cabal: alex is required but it could not be found.
cabal: Error: some packages failed to install:
gtk2hs-buildtools-0.9
On Wednesday 26 May 2010 5:38:57 pm Pete Chown wrote:
> test :: (Eq a) => (Int -> a) -> (Int -> a) -> Bool
> test f1 f2 = unsafePerformIO $ do
> goodSoFar <- newIORef True
> forLoop 1 100 $ \i ->
>when (f1 i /= f2 i) $ writeIORef goodSoFar False
> readIORef goodSoFar
The pro
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Pierre-Etienne Meunier <
pierreetienne.meun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well in this case I'd be really interested in seeing how the can tell the
> difference, be it only from a simple complexity theoretic point of view ! I
> understand they may look for common patterns
Dear list,
As I'm learning frp and reading the wonderful tutorial at
http://www.formicite.com/dopage.php?frp/frp.html
, I'm putting up some more basic cheatsheet style tutorial for myself.
http://github.com/nfjinjing/frp-guide
Feel free to take advantage of it.
--
jinjing
___
Hi Carlos,
Apologies for the lateness of my reply.
On 23 May 2010 02:24, Carlos Camarao wrote:
> I think that a notion of orphan instances based on whether an
> instance is defined or not in the module where the class of the
> instance is defined is not very nice
I broadly agree, but pragmatica
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 01:17:00PM -0700, Evan Laforge wrote:
> Unfortunately then you get another cockamamie restriction in the whole
> JVM vs. tail calls thing... but if you can get around that then lots
> of people will like you a lot.
Working on it... :)
John
--
John Meacham - ⑆rep
Mujtaba Boori wrote:
Define a higher order function that tests whether two functions , both
defined on integers , coincide for all integers between 1 and 100
If this really is a homework question, I dare you to submit this
solution. Try it for yourself, it works fine. :-)
module Main wher
On May 26, 2010, at 17:22 , Pierre-Etienne Meunier wrote:
Well in this case I'd be really interested in seeing how the can
tell the difference, be it only from a simple complexity theoretic
point of view ! I understand they may look for common patterns in
their compiler code to tell the diff
wouldn't they just want to have TCO happen during the compilation into
java? why would you want to output java that has recursion?
-Dan
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Evan Laforge wrote:
>> So, sadly, I think your chances of shipping your a title written in Haskell
>> on the iPhone are shot to
Well in this case I'd be really interested in seeing how the can tell the
difference, be it only from a simple complexity theoretic point of view ! I
understand they may look for common patterns in their compiler code to tell the
difference between GHC's generated code and theirs, but pretending
> So, sadly, I think your chances of shipping your a title written in Haskell
> on the iPhone are shot to hell.
+1 for the android version.
Disclaimer: biased google employee
:P
Unfortunately then you get another cockamamie restriction in the whole
JVM vs. tail calls thing... but if you can ge
keep :: ((t -> b) -> u -> b) -> ((t1 -> t) -> b) -> (t1 -> u) -> b
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
> There are no interesting (i.e. total) functions of that type.
>
I wonder how one would prove that to be the case. I tried and didn't come up
with anything.
David
--
On May 26, 2010, at 10:17 , Pierre-Etienne Meunier wrote:
Anyway, does the license imply that one can't compile GHC's core
language and RTS into objective-c, then compile it with their "so
great" software ?
As I read it, yes; it says that the calls to their APIs must
*originate* from permi
Well, this does not contradict Sam's point, which was that you may have written
nicer, faster and more elegant code in way less time, had you used a true
programming language ;-)
El 26/05/2010, a las 12:28, David Sankel escribió:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 6:19 AM, Sam Martin wrote:
> There’s
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Ryan Trinkle
wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I don't think this licensing issue will be a problem for us. It's not
> clear to me that our game violates this new term, and we certainly don't
> violate any of the principles Steve Jobs used to justify it. If Apple wants
> to
There are no interesting (i.e. total) functions of that type.
2010/5/25 Yitzchak Gale :
> Günther Schmidt wrote:
>> http://www.hpaste.org/fastcgi/hpaste.fcgi/view?id=25694
>> in which I attempt to develop a "currying combinator" library.
>> I'm stuck at some point and would appreciate any help.
>
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 6:19 AM, Sam Martin wrote:
> There’s a lot of missed opportunities for more elegant and powerful
> architectures going by at the moment simple because it’s not realistic to
> attempt them in C/C++.
>
I beg to differ on that point. See my presentation[1]/paper[2] I gave at
If you guys get a nice library layer going between the Java APIs and
Android NDK Haskell, I would very much like it if you could post it up
somewhere. I think the entire community could benefit.
Cheers.
~Liam
On 26 May 2010 19:51, Ryan Trinkle wrote:
> Hi guys,
> I don't think this licensing i
Anyway, does the license imply that one can't compile GHC's core language and
RTS into objective-c, then compile it with their "so great" software ?
El 26/05/2010, a las 05:51, Ryan Trinkle escribió:
> Hi guys,
>
> I don't think this licensing issue will be a problem for us. It's not clear
Arie Peterson wrote:
> After upgrading to haskell-platform-2010.1.0.0, with the improved unicode
> support for IO in ghc-6.12, I hoped to be able to deal with filenames
> containing non-ascii characters. This still seems problematic, though
Yes, unfortunately. This is not simple to fix, for severa
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Arie Peterson wrote:
> Is this a known problem? I searched ghc's trac, but there are no relevant
> bugs for the component 'libraries/directory'.
>
This bug might be relevant:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/3307
___
I wrote:
> keep :: (forall c . (t -> c) -> u -> c) -> ((t1 -> t) -> b) -> (t1 ->
> u) -> b
> keep transform rec = \fn -> rec $ transform id . fn
Just to clarify - you don't really need the RankNTypes here, I just
wrote it that way so you could see what I had been thinking,
and to make it c
After upgrading to haskell-platform-2010.1.0.0, with the improved unicode
support for IO in ghc-6.12, I hoped to be able to deal with filenames
containing non-ascii characters. This still seems problematic, though:
$ ls
m×n♯α
$ ghci
GHCi, version 6.12.1: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ :? for help
Pr
I wrote:
>> keep :: ((t -> b) -> u -> b) -> ((t1 -> t) -> b) -> (t1 -> u) -> b
>> so then
>> nameZip = keep (drop' . drop') names
Günther Schmidt wrote:
> don't be tease man, show me what you got :)
Ivan Miljenovic wrote:
>> Methinks Yitzchak made a typo
Yes, sorry about that. Tested in
I work in the games industry and I'm also not convinced of the Haskell+FRP path
for games, but for different reasons. I am very fond of Haskell for games
however, and think it is achievable.
Regarding FRP, I don't think it is the right framework to base a game on. It's
great for some stuff,
Hi guys,
I don't think this licensing issue will be a problem for us. It's not clear
to me that our game violates this new term, and we certainly don't violate
any of the principles Steve Jobs used to justify it. If Apple wants to
reject our app, they already have a variety of excuses at their d
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:46:47PM +0100, Stephen Tetley wrote:
> Hi Eugene
>
> You can store different things in a Map by collecting them with a
> simple 'sum' type:
Hello, Stephen!
The records to be stored into a Map are not related to each other. So wrapping
them into another type is not very
On May 26, 2010, at 04:14 , David Virebayre wrote:
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
wrote:
You might want to reread that license agreement. Specifically:
Ah, yes. Ouch, that's abusive.
Can they tell the difference though ?
I suspect GHC-generated code is fairly di
Of course, given that they have no way of determining that short of asking
for the source code (and hiring another thousand reviewers to read it) or
applying static analysis tools with heuristics to the programs. I really
doubt they do the latter, and the former is unrealistic.
Most people seem to
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
wrote:
> You might want to reread that license agreement. Specifically:
>
> "Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or
> JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code
> written in C, C++, an
On May 26, 2010, at 03:50 , David Virebayre wrote:
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Lyndon Maydwell
wrote:
As a side note, how is this project getting around the language
restrictions apple put in the developer license agreement?
From the project page :
This version uses Apple's official
> The GHC bugs are now fixed, so it might be stable enough for
> another adventure like that, but I don't think I would bet on it
> again.
GHC bugs are corrected, but Reactive still have some. (See my previous
posts)
> IMO Haskell is great for writing small clean prototypes, doing
> interesting r
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Lyndon Maydwell wrote:
> As a side note, how is this project getting around the language
> restrictions apple put in the developer license agreement?
>From the project page :
This version uses Apple's official iPhone SDK as its back end compiler.
David.
___
This sounds fantastic. Now I wish I had started learning haskell a few
years earlier.
As a side note, how is this project getting around the language
restrictions apple put in the developer license agreement?
--- [http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler]
In the new
41 matches
Mail list logo
