On 4/10/06, Ross Paterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What other libraries should Haskell' support, and what are their
> requirements?
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/CollectionClassFramework
There are two "range arguments" here, IIUC.
Jim
__
On 3/29/06, Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Proposal: make all pattern bindings completely monomorphic
> (regardless of type signatures)
...
> My bet is that this is a
> feature that is tricky to implement, but which is virtually never used.
If this prop
On 3/28/06, isaac jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The only topics that should remain open are concurrency and
> the class system.
What happene to bullet 3, "perhaps standard libraries"?
Jim
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
htt
Has this list yet discussed John's supertyping proposal?
http://repetae.net/john/recent/out/supertyping.html
Jim
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
On 2/8/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It seems we can emulate the restricted data types in existing
> Haskell.
I have proposed this for Haskell' libraries. See
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/ticket/98
Jim
___
Haskell
I have created a ticket to make a standard collection interface. It is here:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/ticket/97
Obviously, it will be tough to figure out what the library can look
like without knowing what MPTC's will look like.
Jim
__
On 3/18/06, Aaron Denney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rational _could_ be added here by the diagonal representation, but
> probably sohuldn't.
We could also add an actual enumeration of rationals, as in
http://web.comlab.ox.ac.uk/oucl/work/jeremy.gibbons/publications/rationals.pdf
It would be qui
On 3/7/06, Ben Rudiak-Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
# John Meacham wrote:
# # Polymorphic recursion allows the construction of infinite types if I
# # understand what you mean.
#
# No, that's different. An infinite type can't be written in (legal) Haskell.
Though GHC with existentials allows so
On 3/6/06, Lennart Augustsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can it be implemented efficiently?
Section 8, p. 8:
"This leads to a simple compilation scheme that gives constant access
to labels, but avoids the many runtime parameters for extension. The
extension operation is done dynamically but sinc
On 3/2/06, Alson Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the beginning steps of how to use multiparameter
> classes to implement a consistent set of Collections
> and subclasses.
See also this blurb from HWN:
"
* RFC: Class-based collections. Jean-Philippe Bernardy [25]released
an rfc for his ini
On 3/1/06, Johannes Waldmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But my point was that I want to use
> "do notation" for Sets (in fact, for any kind of collection)
> so I'd need the original Functor and Monad.
I understand this for Monad. Why not just redefine Functor, Oleg-style?
> I couldn't use ghc's
On 2/28/06, Johannes Waldmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Malcolm Wallace wrote:
>
> > But if contexts-on-datatypes worked correctly,
> >
> > data Set a = Ord a =>
> >
> > then even the "real" map from Data.Set:
> >
> > map :: (Ord a, Ord b) => (a -> b) -> Set a -> Set b
> >
> > could
On 2/4/06, Pablo Barenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2. There is not a way to define functions operating on all
> of these types. Instead, different functions (like zip,
> zip3) must be defined.
There is a discussion of how to do this with constraint handling rules
at http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg
On 2/9/06, S.J.Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim - it's worth looking at the proposal for views, proposed by Warren
> Burton et al, accessible from
>
> http://haskell.galois.com/cgi-bin/haskell-prime/trac.cgi/wiki/Views
Views have been getting a "no", and it seems like this is because of
On 2/8/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems we can emulate the restricted data types in existing
> Haskell.
...
> > {-# OPTIONS -fglasgow-exts #-}
> > {-# OPTIONS -fallow-undecidable-instances #-}
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cvs.ghc/13500
Indicates that
On 2/10/06, isaac jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Without a solution, Haskell' will be somewhat
> obsolete before it gets off the ground.
This seems to be a serious stumbling block - has there been thought of
delay? Would it be worth it to wait a couple of years if doing so
would get this right
Sometimes I'd like to use a smart constructor but have pattern
matching as well. There has been talk elsewhere of allowing export of
data constructors for /matching/ but not for /construction/:
module One-
data Picky a = Nil | One a
picky x = if some_complex_thing x then One x else
Is this the appropriate place to discuss libraries for HPrime?
Clearly, we can't really be sure what changes (if any) can be made to
existing libraries until the core language is decided upon. On the
other hand, we might agree that some libraries should be added, though
their interface must wait u
Have we considered Restricted Data Types?
http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~rjmh/Papers/restricted-datatypes.ps
Or even absracting over contexts, as described in section 7.5 (p.
14/15) of the above?
Jim
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
Would we consider type class directives, as in:
http://www.cs.uu.nl/~bastiaan/padl05-heeren-slides.pdf
http://www.cs.uu.nl/~bastiaan/hh05classdirs.pdf
The idea is that there are some modifiers to class declarations:
never
close
disjoint
default
I assume the committee knows these better than I,
> ... read the JFP journal submission that Martin Sulzmann and Peter
> Stuckey and I have been working on.
> http://research.microsoft.com/%7Esimonpj/papers/fd-chr
Has this list discussed using CHRs instead of fundeps?
Jim
___
Haskell-prime mail
21 matches
Mail list logo
