I had been missing a pattern matching lambda in Haskell for a long time
(SML had "fn" since ages) and my typical use will be
monadic_expr >>= \case
branches
I think "\case" is not the worst choice, certainly better than "of" ...
Thanks to the GHC 7.6 developers!
Cheers,
Andreas
On 29.1
Hi Mark,
I might become your user. Currently, for Agda I have rolled my own
sparse matrix implementation, see
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/Agda/latest/doc/html/src/Agda-Termination-SparseMatrix.html
Cheers,
Andreas
On 29.11.12 5:03 PM, Mark Flamer wrote:
I am looking to cont
Brent Yorgey wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:52:58AM +0100, Ben Franksen wrote:
>> Tony Morris wrote:
>> > As a side note, I think a direct superclass of Functor for Monad is not
>> > a good idea, just sayin'
>> >
>> > class Functor f where
>> > fmap :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b
>> >
>> > clas
* Yitzchak Gale [2012-11-30 00:28:45+0200]
> I think the proper abstraction would be a more
> general fold or traversal over a directory structure.
> Some languages have something like that (e.g.,
> os.walk in Python).
Check out
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/filemanip/latest/doc/ht
Hi David,
David Thomas wrote:
> https://github.com/dlthomas/tzcache
> A small bit of code, but seems likely to be useful enough that I figured I
> should share.
>
Thanks for sharing this!
> 1) Does this already exist somewhere I missed?
>
I haven't seen it anywhere.
> 2) It seems silly to m
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:52:58AM +0100, Ben Franksen wrote:
> Tony Morris wrote:
> > As a side note, I think a direct superclass of Functor for Monad is not
> > a good idea, just sayin'
> >
> > class Functor f where
> > fmap :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b
> >
> > class Functor f => Apply f where
>
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Daniel Fischer
> wrote:
>> On Donnerstag, 29. November 2012, 13:40:42, Johan Tibell wrote:
>>> word2Double :: Word -> Double
>>> word2Double (W# w) = D# (int2Double# (word2Int# w))
>>>
>>> On my (64-bit) machi
On Donnerstag, 29. November 2012, 13:40:42, Johan Tibell wrote:
>
> word2Double :: Word -> Double
> word2Double (W# w) = D# (int2Double# (word2Int# w))
>
> On my (64-bit) machine the Haskell and C versions are on par.
On my box, the Haskell is even faster then, but, as said, the result is
incor
On 29 November 2012 18:09, Fixie Fixie wrote:
>
> What is your experience, dear haskellers? To me it seems this beautiful
> language is useless without a better lazy/eager-analyzer.
Since when has speed been the sole arbiter of utility?
10 years ago I switched from Clean to Haskell, even thoug
I am looking to continue to learn Haskell while working on something that
might eventually be useful to others and get posted on Hackage. I have
written quite a bit of Haskell code now, some useful and a lot just throw
away for learning. In the past others have expressed interest in having a
native
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Daniel Fischer
wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 29. November 2012, 13:40:42, Johan Tibell wrote:
>> word2Double :: Word -> Double
>> word2Double (W# w) = D# (int2Double# (word2Int# w))
>>
>> On my (64-bit) machine the Haskell and C versions are on par.
>
> Yes, but the resu
On Donnerstag, 29. November 2012, 13:40:42, Johan Tibell wrote:
> word2Double :: Word -> Double
> word2Double (W# w) = D# (int2Double# (word2Int# w))
>
> On my (64-bit) machine the Haskell and C versions are on par.
Yes, but the result is very different.
_
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Johan Tibell wrote:
> This version works around the Word->Double conversion bug and shows
> good performance:
I'd also like to point out that I've removed lots of bang patterns
that weren't needed. This program runs fine without any bang patterns
(but I've kept th
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Daniel Fischer
wrote:
> We have an unpleasant regression in comparison to 7.2.* and the 7.4.* were
> slower than 7.6.1 is, but it's all okay here (not that it wouldn't be nice to
> have it faster still).
>
> Are you on a 32-bit system?
This version works around th
On Donnerstag, 29. November 2012, 21:00:36, Fixie Fixie wrote:
> The program seems to take around 6 seconds on my linux-box, while the c
> version goes for 0.06 sekcond.
>
> That is really some regression bug :-)
>
> Anyone with a more recent version thatn 7.4.1?
I don't even have a problem with
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Fixie Fixie wrote:
> That's really an argument for upgrading to 7.4.2 :-)
>
> Another reason for doing things with haskell is this mailing list.
FYI I'm still looking into this issue as I'm not 100% happy with the
code GHC generates.
_
That's really an argument for upgrading to 7.4.2 :-)
Another reason for doing things with haskell is this mailing list.
Thanks!
Felix
Fra: Johan Tibell
Til: Fixie Fixie
Kopi: Haskell cafe
Sendt: Torsdag, 29. november 2012 22.06
Emne: Re: [Haskell-cafe] To
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fixie Fixie wrote:
> The program seems to take around 6 seconds on my linux-box, while the c
> version goes for 0.06 sekcond.
>
> That is really some regression bug :-)
>
> Anyone with a more recent version thatn 7.4.1?
On 7.4.2:
$ time ./c_test
...
real0m0.
The program seems to take around 6 seconds on my linux-box, while the c version
goes for 0.06 sekcond.
That is really some regression bug :-)
Anyone with a more recent version thatn 7.4.1?
Felix
Fra: Johan Tibell
Til: Fixie Fixie
Kopi: Haskell cafe
Sendt
Ack, it seems like you're running into one of these bugs (all now
fixed, but I don't know in which GHC version):
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/search?q=doubleFromInteger
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org
Oh, my - what an indentation :-)
New try:
- Videresendt melding
Fra: Fixie Fixie
Til: "haskell-cafe@haskell.org"
Kopi: Clark Gaebel
Sendt: Torsdag, 29. november 2012 20.57
Emne: Vedr: [Haskell-cafe] To my boss: The code is cool, but it is about 100
times slower than the old one...
If you can give an example of some underperforming code, I'm sure someone
(or several people) on this list would be more than happy to help you make
it more performant.
Generally, it doesn't take much. It's all in knowing where to look. Also,
if you know performance is key, you should be using the
I hear you, my friend.
What I love of Haskell is that a lot of algorithms are very clean to
express and understand compared to, say, Lisp or C. Compared to Lisp,
function manipulation is also very clean (even compared to Racket). A great
plus is also type inference.
The bad side is that direct tr
Hi Felix,
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Fixie Fixie
wrote:
> The problem seems to be connected to lazy loading, which makes my programs
> so slow that I really can not show them to anyone. I have tried all tricks
> in the books, like !, seq, non-lazy datatypes...
My advice usually goes like
I know it's not wx, but if you were willing to use GTK, you could simply
install:
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/gtk-jsinput
and generate the form automatically as described in:
https://github.com/timthelion/gtk-jsinput/blob/master/Graphics/UI/Gtk/
Custom/JSInput.hs
Timothy
-
Hi there,
I'm only an amateur so just my 2 cent: Haskell can be really fast, but
reaching that speed can be all but trivial: you need to use different data
types (e.g. ByteString vs. the normal String type) relies on
"unconventional" IO (e.g. Conduit, Iterateee) and still be ready to go "out
of the
Hi all haskellers
I every now and then get the feeling that doing my job code in Haskell would be
a good idea.
I have tried a couple of times, but each time I seem to run into performance
problems - I do lots of heavy computing.
The problem seems to be connected to lazy loading, which makes my
Ben Franksen writes:
> just wanted to drop by to say how much I like the new lambda case extension.
> I use it all the time and I just *love* how it relieves me from conjuring up
> dummy variables, which makes teh code not only esier to write but also to
> read.
> […] should *definitely* go i
Nathan Hüsken wrote:
Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
Personally, I would recommend is a complete change in perspective.
The main idea of FRP is that it is a method to describe the evolution of
values in time. What is a game? It's just a picture that evolves in
time. The user can exert influence on th
Rune Harder Bak wrote:
> I'm very interested in FRP, but all the examples I could see was forms
> with "live" feedback gui like a real-time calculator.
> This is a one-time form where the user fills everything in, clicks on
> a button, where after the computations might take a long time, perhaps
I'm very interested in FRP, but all the examples I could see was
forms with "live" feedback
gui like a real-time calculator.
This is a one-time form where the user fills everything in, clicks on a button,
where after the computations might take a long time, perhaps display
some console-info.
But m
Good point. Done.
On 29.11.12 06:16, Conrad Parker wrote:
#REDIRECT [[IDEs]]
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Hi there Rune,
if you want to get started with declarative GUI programming in Haskell,
I really recommend taking the FRP route. Check out the
reactive-banana-wx [1] library instead of using wxHaskell directly. If
you manage to get wxHaskell working on Windows, then reactive-banana
will work as w
Hi
I have some input parameters
data Input = ...
that I need the user to enter in a gui pop-up. (windows people...)
The rest of the app is not gui (or perhaps progress could be displayed
in a log-window)
What is the easiest way to make such a GUI form?
It need to compile for both Linux and Windo
The example is assuming you have an import statement like this:
import qualified Sound.Sox.Option.Format as Option
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Gary Klindt wrote:
> Dear Cafe,
>
> after installing the Sox library
> (cabal install sox)
> I wanted to let run a minimal example from
> http://hac
Thank you, MigMit!
If I replace your type FoldSTVoid with:
data FoldMVoid = FoldMVoid {runFold :: Monad m => (Int -> m ()) -> m ()}
then everything works magically with any monad!
That is exactly what I wanted, though I still do not quite understand why
wrapping the type solves the problem
Dmitr
Well, I took Bardur's suggestion and avoided all the complexities of GHC's
IO stack and simply used System.Posix.IO and Foreign.This appears to
work, but for better or worse, it is using blocking calls to the "read"
system call and is not integrated with GHC's IO manager. This shouldn't
b
37 matches
Mail list logo
