Please see
http://pyfound.blogspot.in/2013/02/python-trademark-at-risk-in-europe-we.html
I cannot say that I understand whats really going on
The one thing that I get is that there was some minor neglect a decade or
more ago.
http://blog.languager.orgMaybe there are things that Haskell needs to
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Gregg Reynolds d...@mobileink.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Ben Lippmeier b...@ouroborus.net wrote:
Laziness at the value level causes space leaks, and laziness at the type
level causes mind leaks. Neither are much fun.
If the designers could
On 29 Apr 2011, at 05:38, Ben Lippmeier b...@ouroborus.net wrote:
Laziness at the value level causes space leaks,
This is well-worn folklore, but a bit misleading. Most of my recent space
leaks have been caused by excessive strictness.
Space leaks occur in all kinds of programs and
On 29/04/2011, at 6:08 PM, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
On 29 Apr 2011, at 05:38, Ben Lippmeier b...@ouroborus.net wrote:
Laziness at the value level causes space leaks,
This is well-worn folklore, but a bit misleading.
:-) Like permanent markers in the hands of children causes suffering.
On 29 Apr 2011, at 10:42, Ben Lippmeier wrote:
On 29/04/2011, at 6:08 PM, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
On 29 Apr 2011, at 05:38, Ben Lippmeier b...@ouroborus.net wrote:
Laziness at the value level causes space leaks,
This is well-worn folklore, but a bit misleading.
:-) Like
Chris Smith cdsm...@gmail.com wrote:
Sometimes I wish for a -fphp flag that would turn some type errors
into warnings. Example:
v.hs:8:6:
Couldn't match expected type `[a]' against inferred type `()'
In the first argument of `a', namely `y'
In the expression: a y
Ketil Malde ketil at malde.org writes:
In Haskell, I often need to add stubs of undefined in order to do
this. I don't mind, since it is often very useful to say *something*
about the particular piece - e.g. I add the type signature, establishing
the shape of the missing piece without
Gracjan Polak gracjanpo...@gmail.com wrote:
Ketil Malde ketil at malde.org writes:
In Haskell, I often need to add stubs of undefined in order to do
this. I don't mind, since it is often very useful to say
*something* about the particular piece - e.g. I add the type
signature,
On Apr 28, 2011 9:25 AM, Ertugrul Soeylemez e...@ertes.de wrote:
Sometimes I wish for a -fphp flag that would turn some type errors
into warnings. Example:
v.hs:8:6:
Couldn't match expected type `[a]' against inferred type `()'
In the first argument of `a', namely `y'
On Apr 28, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Ertugrul Soeylemez wrote:
Gracjan Polak gracjanpo...@gmail.com wrote:
Ketil Malde ketil at malde.org writes:
In Haskell, I often need to add stubs of undefined in order to do
this. I don't mind, since it is often very useful to say
*something* about the
On 11-04-27 05:44 PM, serialhex wrote:
in ruby they use what some call duck typing if it looks
like a duck and quacks like a duck... it's a duck.
Python and Javascript also do duck typing.
Haskell does Functor typing. A Functor is something that provides an
fmap method. List does it, so you
(Sorry if you get this twice, Ertugrul; and if I reply to top. I'm
stuck with the gmail interface and I'm not used to it.)
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Ertugrul Soeylemez e...@ertes.de wrote:
I don't see any problem with this. Although I usually have a bottom-up
approach, so I don't do
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Dan Doel dan.d...@gmail.com wrote:
(Sorry if you get this twice, Ertugrul; and if I reply to top. I'm
stuck with the gmail interface and I'm not used to it.)
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Ertugrul Soeylemez e...@ertes.de wrote:
I don't see any problem
Dan,
I believe there was some work on this functionality for GHC some time
ago (agda-like goals for GHC, where ? in agda merely becomes
'undefined' in haskell.) See:
https://github.com/sebastiaanvisser/ghc-goals
This work was done a few years ago during a hackathon (the 09 Utrecht
hackathon.)
By reading John Hughes's paper Why Functional Programming Matters it
is easy to understand why lazy evaluation is great, I don't see that
kind of benefits with lazy typing.
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 6:30 AM, Henning Thielemann
lemm...@henning-thielemann.de wrote:
I like to apply for the quote of
On 27/04/2011, at 7:30 PM, Henning Thielemann wrote:
If Haskell is great because of its laziness,
then Python must be even greater,
since it is lazy at the type level.
Laziness at the value level causes space leaks, and laziness at the type level
causes mind leaks. Neither are much
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Ben Lippmeier b...@ouroborus.net wrote:
On 27/04/2011, at 7:30 PM, Henning Thielemann wrote:
If Haskell is great because of its laziness,
then Python must be even greater,
since it is lazy at the type level.
Laziness at the value level causes
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 07:19, Gracjan Polak gracjanpo...@gmail.com wrote:
Sometimes I wish for a -fphp flag that would turn some type
errors into warnings.
[...]
GHC could substitute 'y = error Couldn't match expected type
`[a]' against inferred type `()'' and compile anyway.
PHP doesn't
I like to apply for the quote of the week. :-)
If Haskell is great because of its laziness,
then Python must be even greater,
since it is lazy at the type level.
Dynamically typed languages only check types if they have to, that is if
expressions are actually computed. Does this prove
2011/4/27 Henning Thielemann lemm...@henning-thielemann.de:
I like to apply for the quote of the week. :-)
If Haskell is great because of its laziness,
then Python must be even greater,
since it is lazy at the type level.
Dynamically typed languages only check types if they have to,
Henning Thielemann lemm...@henning-thielemann.de writes:
I like to apply for the quote of the week. :-)
If Haskell is great because of its laziness,
then Python must be even greater,
since it is lazy at the type level.
Well, this is indeed (an elegant reformulation of) a common
2011/4/27 Ketil Malde ke...@malde.org:
Henning Thielemann lemm...@henning-thielemann.de writes:
That Haskell is great because of its laziness is arguable, see Robert
Harper's blog for all the arguing. (http://existentialtype.wordpress.com/)
I think that author sin't quite right there.
On 27 Apr 2011, at 10:30, Henning Thielemann wrote:
I like to apply for the quote of the week. :-)
If Haskell is great because of its laziness,
then Python must be even greater,
since it is lazy at the type level.
Dynamically typed languages only check types if they have to, that
On 27/04/11 20:02, Thomas Davie wrote:
This completely misses what laziness gives Haskell – it gives a way of
completing a smaller number of computations than it otherwise would have to
at run time. The hope being that this speeds up the calculation of the
result after the overhead of
It would be, if only it checked the (necessary) types during compile time. As
it is now, it seems like a claim that C is lazy just because any pointer can be
null.
Отправлено с iPhone
Apr 27, 2011, в 13:30, Henning Thielemann lemm...@henning-thielemann.de
написал(а):
I like to apply for
2011/4/27 MigMit miguelim...@yandex.ru:
It would be, if only it checked the (necessary) types during compile time. As
it is now, it seems like a claim that C is lazy just because any pointer can
be null.
Strictness analysis is only an optimization, you don't need it to be
lazy in the
Thomas Davie wrote:
This completely misses what laziness gives Haskell – it gives a way of
completing a smaller number of computations than it otherwise would have to at
run time. (...)
Tony Morris continues the ping-pong:
This is not what laziness gives us. Rather, it gives us terminating
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 6:07 AM, Jerzy Karczmarczuk
jerzy.karczmarc...@unicaen.fr wrote:
Thomas Davie wrote:
This completely misses what laziness gives Haskell – it gives a way of
completing a smaller number of computations than it otherwise would have to
at run time. (...)
Tony Morris
Alexander Solla comments my comment :
Alright, my turn. I never wanted to write non-terminating programs
(what for?),
Daemons/servers/console interfaces/streaming clients?
Come on, not THIS kind of non-termination. This has little to do with
strictness/laziness, I think. Endless
so, as a n00b to haskell i can't say much about its laziness, and not
knowing much about how python works i'm about the same there. though i do
know ruby, and afaik ruby doesn't _care_ what type something is, just if it
can do something. example from the rails framework:
#---
class NilClass
On 11-04-27 05:30 AM, Henning Thielemann wrote:
I like to apply for the quote of the week. :-)
If Haskell is great because of its laziness,
then Python must be even greater,
since it is lazy at the type level.
Using Data.Dynamic, Haskell has a story for laziness at the type level, too.
Thank you all for your answers and sorry for the delay I'm writing
this message but before replying, I wanted to be sure to understand
your arguments!
Now, I'm starting to get into this tying the knot thing and
understand why the Haskell version of fib ties the knot while my
Python version does
On 17 Jul 2009, at 12:41, Cristiano Paris wrote:
Thank you all for your answers and sorry for the delay I'm writing
this message but before replying, I wanted to be sure to understand
your arguments!
Now, I'm starting to get into this tying the knot thing and
understand why the Haskell
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Thomas Davietom.da...@gmail.com wrote:
Memoization is not a feature of lazyness. If you can do it in such a way
that you don't waste significant amount of RAM, then it may be a nice
optimisation, and an alternative evaluation strategy, but it would not be
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Cristiano Parisfr...@theshire.org wrote:
...
Now, to confirm my hypothesis, I wrote a slight different version of
fib, like follows:
fib' n = 1:1:(fib' n) `plus` (tail $ fib' n) where plus = zipWith (+)
i.e. I inserted a fictious argument n in the
BTW, after a -O2 compilation, fib' is apparently as fast a fib.
The compiler is your friend. :o)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Hi,
as pointed out in this list, it seems that a tying the knot example
would be the one better explaining the power of Haskell's
lazy-by-default approach against Python+Iterator's approach to
laziness.
So, in these days I'm trying to grasp the meaning of this tying the
knot concept which seems
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Cristiano
Pariscristiano.pa...@gmail.com wrote:
fib = 1:1:fib `plus` (tail fib) where plus = zipWith (+)
Of course, this was something I already encountered when exploring the
Y-combinator. Anyhow, I tried to translate this implementation to
Python using
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Max Rabkinmax.rab...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Cristiano
Pariscristiano.pa...@gmail.com wrote:
fib = 1:1:fib `plus` (tail fib) where plus = zipWith (+)
...
...
This indicates that you think tying the knot should be impossible in
Robert Greayer wrote:
Isn't tying the knot (in the way 'fib' does) straightforward with closures
a la Python/Ruby/Smalltalk (without mutation)?
Even in a syntactically clumsy language like Java, a
tying-the-knot implementation equivalent to the canonical Haskell one is
not difficult, e.g.
Hi all,
Finally I found some time to reply to this posting. A couple of years ago we
did something called Data Field Haskell, which is Haskell extended with a
generalized form of arrays called data fields. Much of the purpose was to
investigate convenient and general syntax for array
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Its good for small scripting tasks. Its good for string processing.
I find the dynamic typing a pain.
What's dynamic typing?
I can't say it any better than this:
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?DynamicTyping
Basically, types are determined
Quinn Dunkan wrote:
Python has first class functions and lexical scoping, and encourages
higher-order functions, though to a much lesser degree than a real
functional language.
I was surprised to hear about first class functions and higher order
functions. So I googled for a bit, and I found
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Its good for small scripting tasks. Its good for string processing.
I find the dynamic typing a pain.
What's dynamic typing?
I have a lady friend who wants to learn how to program. I just decided
to teach her Python for practical reasons:
Its a great first language for
Jerzy Karczmarczuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Syntax for 3D arrays?
Give me one single language where this is natural and immediate.
I can think of 3: Mathematica, Maple and APL.
But I hope you don't
try to convince us that Mathematica is good at number crunching...
For linear algebra, Maple,
Hello Jerzy,
Wednesday, May 11, 2005, 3:40:51 PM, you wrote:
JK I suppose that if somebody decides to use lambdas, he wants to do some
JK functional programming, no?
well, i am use this all the way :) simplified example of one usage:
(allocate, shrink) - memoryAllocator buf size
(buf,size) -
Jerzy Karczmarczuk a écrit :
Pierre Barbier de Reuille wrote about Python and lambdas:
Well, I would not recommand using lambda functions ! The main reason
is they are limited in that they only accept expressions (ie. not
statements) and you can end up with very ugly things (mainly because
of
Jacques Carette writes:
Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote:
Syntax for 3D arrays?
Give me one single language where this is natural and immediate.
I can think of 3: Mathematica, Maple and APL.
Well, you are the village specialist on Maple here,so I won't argue too
long, but kill me, I can't see how Maple
On Wed, 11 May 2005, Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote:
Pierre Barbier de Reuille wrote about Python and lambdas:
Well, I would not recommand using lambda functions ! The main reason
is they are limited in that they only accept expressions (ie. not
statements) and you can end up with very ugly things
Tim Rowe writes:
On 5/11/05, Jerzy Karczmarczuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Give me one single language where [3-d arrays are] natural and immediate.
I don't know how Matlab does it, but I find the C++ standard library
vectorvectorvectorfloat
entirely intuitive (apart, perhaps, for the need for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jacques Carette writes:
Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote:
Syntax for 3D arrays?
Give me one single language where this is natural and immediate.
I can think of 3: Mathematica, Maple and APL.
I can't see how Maple makes things more *natural and
immediate* than Matlab *in
Daniel Carrera wrote:
This might be a strange question to ask on a Haskell list, but I do want
to hear your opinions. What do you think of Python?
I learnt it some years ago to do some simple text processing. Eventually
I used it for three small projects. I learnt to hate dynamic typing, I
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 13:06:51 +0200
From: Jerzy Karczmarczuk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Vanier comments my defense of Matlab:
I used objects, and even a lot of functional
constructs. I don't see any reason to call it a creeping horror.
It is quite homogeneous and simple, and is decently
Hello,
This might be a strange question to ask on a Haskell list, but I do want
to hear your opinions. What do you think of Python?
To explain where this question is comming from:
I have a lady friend who wants to learn how to program. I just decided
to teach her Python for practical reasons:
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 19:02:33 -0400
From: Daniel Carrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
This might be a strange question to ask on a Haskell list, but I do want
to hear your opinions. What do you think of Python?
To explain where this question is comming from:
I have a lady friend who
At 20:55 25/10/04 +0200, Remi Turk wrote:
P.S. Why do so many people (including me) seem to come to Haskell
from Python? It can't be just the indentation, can it? ;)
I did. (Or: from Java via Python.)
I don't think it's the indentation. At least, not *just* that.
FWIW, I speculate:
1.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Graham Klyne wrote:
At 20:55 25/10/04 +0200, Remi Turk wrote:
P.S. Why do so many people (including me) seem to come to Haskell
from Python? It can't be just the indentation, can it? ;)
I did. (Or: from Java via Python.)
I don't think it's the indentation.
57 matches
Mail list logo
