On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 09:52:27AM -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
> dons:
> > claus.reinke:
> > > >>> From my point of view, the difference between 0b10111011 and
> > > >>> (bin[1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1]) is 22-10 that is 12 characters.
> > >
> > > how about using ghc's new overloaded strings for this?
> > >
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 04:06:56PM +0200, Dusan Kolar wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> // PLS, no flame
>
> I think the question was not whether there's a way, how to handle the
> problem of encryption of a binary number to anything suitable and, more
> or less, readable by a human and transforming it
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Stefan O'Rear wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 09:41:27PM +0200, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> > > Total functions, full laziness, and compile time evaluation of finite
> > > non-bottom CAFs...
> >
> > If I write a program that approximates a big but fixed number of digits of
>
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 09:41:27PM +0200, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> > Total functions, full laziness, and compile time evaluation of finite
> > non-bottom CAFs...
>
> If I write a program that approximates a big but fixed number of digits of
> Pi - how can we prevent the compiler from computing
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Stefan O'Rear wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 02:40:36PM +0200, Josef Svenningsson wrote:
> > On 10/24/07, Neil Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > You can get pretty close with existing Haskell though:
> > >
> > > (bin 100010011)
> > >
> > > where bin :: Integer
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Don Stewart wrote:
> claus.reinke:
> >
> > how about using ghc's new overloaded strings for this?
> >
> >"10111011"::Binary
> >
> > there used to be a way to link to ghc head's docs, but
> > i can't find it right now. the test is
> >
> > http://darcs.haskell.org/testsuite
dons:
> claus.reinke:
> > >>> From my point of view, the difference between 0b10111011 and
> > >>> (bin[1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1]) is 22-10 that is 12 characters.
> >
> > how about using ghc's new overloaded strings for this?
> >
> >"10111011"::Binary
> >
> > there used to be a way to link to ghc he
claus.reinke:
> >>> From my point of view, the difference between 0b10111011 and
> >>> (bin[1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1]) is 22-10 that is 12 characters.
>
> how about using ghc's new overloaded strings for this?
>
>"10111011"::Binary
>
> there used to be a way to link to ghc head's docs, but
> i can'
> From my point of view, the difference between 0b10111011 and
> (bin[1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1]) is 22-10 that is 12 characters.
how about using ghc's new overloaded strings for this?
"10111011"::Binary
there used to be a way to link to ghc head's docs, but
i can't find it right now. the test is
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 02:40:36PM +0200, Josef Svenningsson wrote:
> On 10/24/07, Neil Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > > > Are there binary constants in Haskell, as
> > > > we have, for instance, 0o232 for octal and
> > > > 0xD29A for hexadecimal?
> > >
> > > No, though it is an
Hi,
We have no binary literals in Haskell and there are situations when it
would have been useful to have this feature (e.g., if the spec of
something that you are working with is already provided using this
notation).
While it may be useful to have overloaded binary literals in the usual
Haskell
Dusan Kolar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> // PLS, no flame
I apologize if my post came across as such, that was certainly not the
intent.
> I think the question was [..] whether there's such a literal or not
> and whether it is bad idea to have something like 0b10111011.
I agree.
> From my
Hello all,
// PLS, no flame
I think the question was not whether there's a way, how to handle the
problem of encryption of a binary number to anything suitable and, more
or less, readable by a human and transforming it to a binary form, but
whether there's such a literal or not and whether
On 10/24/07, Neil Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> > > Are there binary constants in Haskell, as
> > > we have, for instance, 0o232 for octal and
> > > 0xD29A for hexadecimal?
> >
> > No, though it is an interesting idea.
>
> You can get pretty close with existing Haskell though:
>
> (b
Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Are there binary constants in Haskell, as
>> we have, for instance, 0o232 for octal and
>> 0xD29A for hexadecimal?
> No, though it is an interesting idea.
Presumably it is less common since octal and hexadecimal are more
compact and almost as easy to in
Prelude> read "0o232" :: Int
154
Prelude> read "0xD29A" :: Int
53914
Prelude>
Maurício wrote:
Hi,
Are there binary constants in Haskell, as
we have, for instance, 0o232 for octal and
0xD29A for hexadecimal?
Thanks,
Maurício
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing
ndmitchell:
> Hi
>
> > > Are there binary constants in Haskell, as
> > > we have, for instance, 0o232 for octal and
> > > 0xD29A for hexadecimal?
> >
> > No, though it is an interesting idea.
>
> You can get pretty close with existing Haskell though:
>
> (bin 100010011)
>
> where bin :: Integer
Hi
> > Are there binary constants in Haskell, as
> > we have, for instance, 0o232 for octal and
> > 0xD29A for hexadecimal?
>
> No, though it is an interesting idea.
You can get pretty close with existing Haskell though:
(bin 100010011)
where bin :: Integer -> Integer, and is left as an exercis
briqueabraque:
> Hi,
>
> Are there binary constants in Haskell, as
> we have, for instance, 0o232 for octal and
> 0xD29A for hexadecimal?
No, though it is an interesting idea.
-- Don
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.has
Hi,
Are there binary constants in Haskell, as
we have, for instance, 0o232 for octal and
0xD29A for hexadecimal?
Thanks,
Maurício
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
20 matches
Mail list logo
