bother with type safe expressions. Also,
this isn't an indictment of static typing in general. This only shows
that my task isn't well suited to Haskell's current static typing.
-Ron Alford
* Note that this was my first and only real haskell project, and all
that this entails.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Neal Alexander wrote:
> - Goal Oriented Behaviors (work in progress)
> - Goal Oriented Planning (work in progress)
I have a library for PDDL parsing and representation[1] that I used in
a recent paper. It's heavy complex types to deal with various
extensions to t
I reopened the bug, since I found slight changes to the file were able
to reproduce the bug in recent versions of ghc-6.9.
I also can't get the -S compilation step to work with the new file,
unless I'm missing a step.
-Ron Alford
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Ron Alford <[EM
/-Tmp-//ghc27223_0/ghc27223_0.s:6080:0:
FATAL:Symbol _XxG_srt already defined.
-Ron Alford
DerivingError.hs
Description: Binary data
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Antoine Latter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Now we never do pattern matching on our input.
>
> This has been pretty educational.
>
Mightily! I'll have to do the same trick for Expr.
Thank you very much!
-Ron
___
Haske
Hey all,
I've reduced my previous problem to a small example. Anyone know why
typeOf (...) would work, but typeOf [...] would not? Is the
derivation for lists funky?
data Expr f = In (f (Expr f))
instance Typeable1 f => Typeable (Expr f) where
typeOf (In x) = mkTyConApp (mkTyCon "TypeTest.Exp
56 AM, Antoine Latter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/7/10 Ron Alford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Ok, I'm closer, but I'm running into a problem with typeOf and lists,
>> of all things:
>> *WouterTest> typeOf (eVar "v" :: TermExpr)
>> Planni
iving instance Data (Expr (And :+: Atomic (Expr (Const :+: Var))))
deriving instance Data (Expr (Const :+: Var))
-Ron Alford
WouterTest.hs
Description: Binary data
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
This is a bit similar to Either. Is there a way to see the generated
instance code for
deriving instance Data Either ?
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Ron Alford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Close - it compiles now! I made a minor change, going to Typeable1
> instead of Typeable:
f is to have a class that gives default
values to type - ick!
-Ron Alford
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Antoine Latter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Ron Alford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm making progress, but how would I make the foll
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Neil Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Ron,
>
>> I'm using GHC 6.8.3 with $ cabal --version
>> cabal-install version 0.5.1
>> using version 1.4.0.1 of the Cabal library
>>
>> I installed Data.Derive from hackage, only to be unable to find the
>> 'derive'
anks,
-Ron
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Ron Alford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, my extension of Wouter's datatypes proved to be unweildy
> So, I'm trying to use
> http://fmapfixreturn.wordpress.com/2008/05/03/simple-extensible-records-now-quick-generic-tric
I'm using GHC 6.8.3 with $ cabal --version
cabal-install version 0.5.1
using version 1.4.0.1 of the Cabal library
I installed Data.Derive from hackage, only to be unable to find the
'derive' binary!
Trying it directly from darcs, I get:
$ ghc --make Setup.hs
[1 of 1] Compiling Main (
Or, if people have easy-enough extensible records that /will/ work
with funky types, I'd be happy to use those!
-Ron
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Ron Alford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Antoine Latter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>&g
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Antoine Latter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It isn't immediately obvious to me that the "Typeable" family of
> classes deal at all with higher-kinded type constructors, but I didn't
> look that hard.
>
Yes, that's what I'm worried about. For people's fun and amu
Well, my extension of Wouter's datatypes proved to be unweildy
So, I'm trying to use
http://fmapfixreturn.wordpress.com/2008/05/03/simple-extensible-records-now-quick-generic-tricks-pt-1/
for extensible records.
I ran across my first problem rather quickly!
data Expr f = In (f (Expr f))
Ok, b
Having made over-use of Wouter's expression idioms, I decided to hack
it into extensible records.
It's not documented, it's probably got holes in its usability, but I
thought I'd post it so people can play with it (and give suggestions
before I rewrite my code to use it!).
I know there are other e
I'm trying to wrap my head around the theoretical aspects of haskell's
type system. Is there a discussion of the topic separate from the
language itself?
Since I come from a rather logic-y background, I have this
(far-fetched) hope that there is a translation from haskell's type
syntax to first or
Here's something that should be an easy extension of Wouter's approach
to extensible datatypes, but I'm failing (possibly since it's 2:20am).
I several classes of expressions I'm trying to represent (thus,
Wouter's approach), and my first operation to implement over them is
printing.
Attached is
Here's the setup:
I have a series of problems that use various logical connectives. The
problem is that they're not all the same. So instead of creating one
giant datatype (or duplicating much code), I'd like to assemble them
like toy blocks.
I've boiled down an example here:
data LogicalConnec
20 matches
Mail list logo
