On 8/31/11 6:48 PM, Patrick Browne wrote:
Hi,
Below are some questions about the logical interpretation of types and
type classes.
[...]
-- Is this an axiom at type level?
It depends how exactly you mean "axiom". Under some interpretations,
Haskell has no way to specify axioms, since all spec
Quoth Luke Evans ,
> I'm planning to start an Objective-C/Cocoa project and would like to
> write it in Haskell as much as possible.
>
> Of course, I can contrive to split the project into app logic (Haskell)
> and UI (Objective-C) with some sort of minimal interface between them;
> possibly just p
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Niklas Larsson wrote:
>>
>> I m not GHC developer but wouldn't JVM LLVM backend be sufficient? Since
>> new GHC AFAIK uses LLVM then it would allow compiling Haskell to LLVM
>> and LLVM to JVM.
>>
>
> The hard part wouldn't be the code generation, but the interop
In addition to the excellent reasons that Mark outlined, there is another
important reason to *not* include gcc and friends in the HP. Every software
developer (as opposed to friend of a friend who just wanted to try to learn
programming with Haskell on a road trip) will already have Xcode inst
On 01/09/2011, at 8:48 , Patrick Browne wrote:
> Hi,
> Below are some questions about the logical interpretation of types and
> type classes.
>
> Thanks,
> Pat
>
> module J where
> type Id = String
> type Position = Integer
> data Person = Person Id Position deriving Show
>
> -- Is this an axi
Hi, everyone,
I am pleased to announce a haskell binding to the ROOT analysis package, HROOT:
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/HROOT
>From wikipedia:
ROOT (http://root.cern.ch) is an object-oriented program and library
developed by CERN. It was originally designed for particle physics
data
Hi,
Below are some questions about the logical interpretation of types and
type classes.
Thanks,
Pat
module J where
type Id = String
type Position = Integer
data Person = Person Id Position deriving Show
-- Is this an axiom at type level?
class Pos a where
getPos :: a -> Position
-- The :type
On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 00:07:23 +0200, KC wrote:
Are there plans a foot (or under fingers) to make a version of Haskell
that runs on the JVM?
UCH has an almost fully functional backend for JVM, see:
http://www.cs.uu.nl/wiki/bin/view/Ehc/UhcUserDocumentation#5_7_2_jazy_Core_based_Java_no_wh
>
> I m not GHC developer but wouldn't JVM LLVM backend be sufficient? Since
> new GHC AFAIK uses LLVM then it would allow compiling Haskell to LLVM
> and LLVM to JVM.
>
The hard part wouldn't be the code generation, but the interop with
the class libraries, finding a workable way to use Java clas
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 15:07 -0700, KC wrote:
> Are there plans a foot (or under fingers) to make a version of Haskell
> that runs on the JVM?
>
I m not GHC developer but wouldn't JVM LLVM backend be sufficient? Since
new GHC AFAIK uses LLVM then it would allow compiling Haskell to LLVM
and LLVM t
I'm planning to start an Objective-C/Cocoa project and would like to write it
in Haskell as much as possible.
Of course, I can contrive to split the project into app logic (Haskell) and UI
(Objective-C) with some sort of minimal interface between them; possibly just
plain old C FFI.
However, I
KC> Are there plans a foot (or under fingers) to make a version of
KC> Haskell that runs on the JVM?
This is probably a fun - or even useful - project, and a lot of people
have had this wish of a general convergence of language runtimes toward
a single VM such as the java one or the .net one.
B
On 7/30/11, Mark Lentczner wrote:
> Hiho - I'm the maintainer of the Mac installer for HP. I thought I'd
> chime in a bit:
>
An expert :)
> On Mac OS X, "developer tools" is essentially synonymous with "Xcode".
> That is, to get the set of standard utilities needed for development
> on compiled
It worked.
Initially I didn't understand what you mean but after some googleing I
figured it out what I had to do so I did this
instance Show a ⇒ Show (Stack a) where
show s = ...
Now, thinking about this, it totally makes sense because Stack cannot
be an instance of Show if the type a is no
Hi,
You might need a class constraint.
instance (Show a) => Show (Stack a) where
This basically lets Haskell know that if your "a" type is Showable then "Stack
a" is also Showable.
Let me know if this works.
Cheers,
Mark Spezzano
On 31/07/2011, at 6:49 PM, Ovidiu Deac wrote:
> For some re
On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 00:07:23 +0200, KC wrote:
Are there plans a foot (or under fingers) to make a version of Haskell
that runs on the JVM?
See
http://wiki.brianweb.net/LambdaVM/LambdaVM
I suppose it has bitrotten.
Regards,
Henk-Jan van Tuyl
--
http://Van.Tuyl.eu/
http://members.chello.n
16 matches
Mail list logo
