On 13 Nov 2007, at 11:03 PM, Jules Bean wrote:
Just to be clear: my proposal is that if you want it to go faster
you do
ghci foo.hi
or
ghci foo.o
... so you still have the option to run on compiled code.
My suggestion is simply that "ghci foo.hs" is an instruction to
load source code (si
Aaron Denney wrote:
On 2007-11-13, Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| "For technical reasons, GHCi can only support the *-form for modules
| which are interpreted, so compiled modules and package modules can
| only contribute their exports to the current scope." B
Thanks, Vasya
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 13:51 -0800, Dan Piponi wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2007 1:24 PM, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I tend to prefer where, but I think that guards & function declarations are
> > more readable than giant if-thens and case constructs.
>
> Up until yesterday I had presumed th
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 14:21 -0800, Ryan Ingram wrote:
> On 11/13/07, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, what stops getRule from going off the end of the array?
> I didn't see anything that prevented that in the code, and
> you're using unsafeAt, which seems like
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But... tell me please, ANYONE, who takes part in this inspiring exchange:
How many COBOL programs have you written in your life?
How many programs in Cobol have you actually SEEN?
Shudder. In '86, I had to modify a COBOL code generator, *written in
COBOL*. The genera
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:51:13 -0800
"Dan Piponi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Up until yesterday I had presumed that guards only applied to
> functions. But I was poking about in the Random module and discovered
> that you can write things like
>
> a | x > 1 = 1
> | x < -1 = -1
> | otherwise =
On 2007-11-13, Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
>> | "For technical reasons, GHCi can only support the *-form for modules
>> | which are interpreted, so compiled modules and package modules can
>> | only contribute their exports to the current scope." But it does me
Trying out some of the great language shootout programs with ghc 6.8 is
producing nice results. For example, our "classic" cache-hammering,
bitwise sieve benchmark is out of the box 10% faster with the new
compiler. The (already rather good) benchmark is here (the
same speed as the OCaml version un
Dan Piponi wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2007 1:24 PM, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I tend to prefer where, but I think that guards & function declarations are
>> more readable than giant if-thens and case constructs.
>
> Up until yesterday I had presumed that guards only applied to
> functions
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Dougal Stanton wrote:
> On 13/11/2007, Henning Thielemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Dougal Stanton wrote:
> >
> > > -- int a = 3;
> > > -- int *pa = &a;
> > > ampersand :: t -> Pointer t
> > > ampersand a = Just a
> >
> > What's bad about using '
I implement bit shifting to get the next rule, as you suggested, and
that cut my run time by 75%. It went from 200 seconds to do 100 rules
on 100 CAs to 50 seconds. Amazing.
Justin
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 11:44:30PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Dougal Stanton wrote:
>
> > -- int a = 3;
> > -- int *pa = &a;
> > ampersand :: t -> Pointer t
> > ampersand a = Just a
>
> What's bad about using 'ampersand' function as replacement for the
> constructo
On Nov 13, 2007 2:49 PM, Stefan O'Rear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> About how wide are your rules usually?
7 bits (3 neighbors on each side plus the current cell).
Justin
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mail
On 13/11/2007, Henning Thielemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Dougal Stanton wrote:
>
> > -- int a = 3;
> > -- int *pa = &a;
> > ampersand :: t -> Pointer t
> > ampersand a = Just a
>
> What's bad about using 'ampersand' function as replacement for the
> constructor 'Just'?
Sure, if the ring size is a power of two, and a is greater than or equal
to 0, then
a `mod` ringSize == a .&. (ringSize - 1)
that is:
a `mod` 8 == a .&. 7
a `mod` 256 == a .&. 255
etc.
On 11/13/07, Justin Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 13, 2007 2:21 PM, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:45:33PM -0800, Justin Bailey wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2007 2:21 PM, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Never mind, I realized this is a ring buffer with `mod` s. That's another
> > slow operation when you're doing code as tight as this. If you can
> > guarantee the
On Nov 13, 2007 2:21 PM, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Never mind, I realized this is a ring buffer with `mod` s. That's another
> slow operation when you're doing code as tight as this. If you can
> guarantee the ring is a power of 2 in size you can use a mask instead, or
> use my or
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Dougal Stanton wrote:
> -- int a = 3;
> -- int *pa = &a;
> ampersand :: t -> Pointer t
> ampersand a = Just a
What's bad about using 'ampersand' function as replacement for the
constructor 'Just'?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Hask
I wonder, is there an equivalent of the 'type' keyword for
constructors? An example:
-- create a pseudo-C pointer type
-- which can point to a value or a
-- null.
type Pointer a = Maybe a
-- int a = 3;
-- int *pa = &a;
ampersand :: t -> Pointer t
ampersand a = Just a
-- int b = *pa.
star :: Po
On 11/13/07, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Also, what stops getRule from going off the end of the array? I didn't
> see anything that prevented that in the code, and you're using unsafeAt,
> which seems like a potential bug.
>
Never mind, I realized this is a ring buffer with `mod` s
One observation is that you're doing a lot of redundant Bool -> Int
conversion.
As you iterate across the array in fillArray, the rule you are using for the
next cell is almost entirely determined by the rule you are using for the
current cell; lop off the top bit, shift left by one, and add the n
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| "For technical reasons, GHCi can only support the *-form for modules
| which are interpreted, so compiled modules and package modules can
| only contribute their exports to the current scope." But it does mean
| the interpreter isn't referentially transparent, which is
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 11:41:20AM -0800, Justin Bailey wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2007 10:56 AM, John Lato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I know there are several important differences between let-expressions
> > and where-clauses regarding scoping and the restriction of "where" to
> > a top-level defini
I've been working on a program over the last few days to evolve
cellular automata rules using a genetic algorithm. Luckily, this email
has nothing to do with CAs but everything to do with Haskell
performance.
For those who don't know, a CA is represented as a row of cells, where
each can be either
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 07:16:01PM +, Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
> I use let in monadic code and in lambda expressions, and where clauses
> everywhere else, pretty much. It's pretty much entirely based on what
> I think "looks" nice.
That's what I do, except I rarely use either where or let in la
On Nov 13, 2007 1:24 PM, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I tend to prefer where, but I think that guards & function declarations are
> more readable than giant if-thens and case constructs.
Up until yesterday I had presumed that guards only applied to
functions. But I was poking about in
I tend to prefer where, but I think that guards & function declarations are
more readable than giant if-thens and case constructs.
"where" can scope over multiple guards, and guards can access things
declared in a "where" clause, both of which are important features:
f xs | len > 2 = y
| l
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 13:08 -0800, Donn Cave wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Neil Mitchell wrote:
>
> >> This depends on whether you are an "expression style" or "declaration
> >> style" programmer.
> >> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Declaration_vs._expression_style
> >> http://www.haskell.
Hi
> Maybe it would be enough to represent the example "where" problem more
> fairly on its own terms. The non-working example has us writing
>
> f = State $ \ x -> y
> where y = ... x ...
I just don't think this example is representative of the typical
decisions in the trade-off. There a
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, John Lato wrote:
> I'd like to thank Henning for pointing out the wiki page, which
> describes one consequence I hadn't considered. I knew I couldn't have
> been the first person to have this question, but I somehow missed it
> before. I agree with Neil, though, that it doe
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Neil Mitchell wrote:
>> This depends on whether you are an "expression style" or "declaration
>> style" programmer.
>> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Declaration_vs._expression_style
>> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Let_vs._Where
>
> Reading the let vs where page
I'd like to thank Henning for pointing out the wiki page, which
describes one consequence I hadn't considered. I knew I couldn't have
been the first person to have this question, but I somehow missed it
before. I agree with Neil, though, that it doesn't seem very neutral.
On Nov 13, 2007 1:58 PM
Hi
> This depends on whether you are an "expression style" or "declaration
> style" programmer.
> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Declaration_vs._expression_style
> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Let_vs._Where
Reading the let vs where page I'm left with the strong impression that
I sho
Hi
> Is there anyway to get a .pdf version of
> http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/?
Yes, you could print it to PDF using something like acrobat distiller.
Otherwise you could modify haddock to generate Latex markup and
compile that.
My question is why you would want thi
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, John Lato wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I know there are several important differences between let-expressions
> and where-clauses regarding scoping and the restriction of "where" to
> a top-level definition. However, frequently I write code in which
> either one would be allowed, and
On Nov 13, 2007 10:56 AM, John Lato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know there are several important differences between let-expressions
> and where-clauses regarding scoping and the restriction of "where" to
> a top-level definition. However, frequently I write code in which
One place I find it u
Hello,
Is there anyway to get a .pdf version of
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/?
Kind regards, Vasili
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Granted, I'm lazy. I read release notes only and only few first pages
to see what's new. Couldn't GHCI be improved to at least give some
hints?
it does!-) watch the prompt, which says '*M>', if all of M's top-level
is in scope, or 'M>', if only M's exports are in scope. check here:
http://www.h
On Nov 13, 2007 6:56 PM, John Lato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I know there are several important differences between let-expressions
> and where-clauses regarding scoping and the restriction of "where" to
> a top-level definition. However, frequently I write code in which
> either one
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 18:38, Tim Newsham wrote:
> > Functional programming languages are now much more widely used in
> > industry, primarily because they offer substantial productivity
> > improvements (roughly 10x) over C++ and Java and, consequently, are much
> > more cost effective.
>
> D
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 16:03, Laurent Deniau wrote:
> OCaml was used to write a meta-program which applies heuristics to
> minimize the runtime of the critical C code (i.e. the butterflies). This
> has nothing to do with FFT computation
No. The sole purpose of the OCaml code is to symbolicall
Peter Verswyvelen wrote:
When I start a windowed program (e.g. GLUT or GTK2Hs) from within GHCi,
my application’s window does not become the foreground window.
Is this on purpose?
This is just a guess, I do not really know :-)
Maybe your problem is focus stealing prevention, which is a featu
Hello,
I know there are several important differences between let-expressions
and where-clauses regarding scoping and the restriction of "where" to
a top-level definition. However, frequently I write code in which
either one would be allowed, and I was wondering if there were any
guidelines or pr
2007/11/13, Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> | "For technical reasons, GHCi can only support the *-form for modules
> | which are interpreted, so compiled modules and package modules can
> | only contribute their exports to the current scope." But it does mean
> | the interpreter isn't r
Functional programming languages are now much more widely used in industry,
primarily because they offer substantial productivity improvements (roughly
10x) over C++ and Java and, consequently, are much more cost effective.
Do you have any references for this?
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Cons
On Nov 13, 2007, at 13:32 , Dan Piponi wrote:
On Nov 13, 2007 3:00 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Dan, can you suggest any words we could add to the
documentation that would have prevented you stumbling?
I guess the thing that would have helped best would
On Nov 13, 2007 3:00 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan, can you suggest any words we could add to the
> documentation that would have prevented you stumbling?
I guess the thing that would have helped best would have been an error
message like "'x' not in scope
When I start a windowed program (e.g. GLUT or GTK2Hs) from within GHCi, my
application's window does not become the foreground window.
Is this on purpose?
Thanks,
Peter
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.hask
On Nov 13, 2007 7:09 AM, Bayley, Alistair
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You're using runghc, so I guess that must use ghci, or something
> equivalent. You may find, now that you've changed the cabal entry to
> libpq, that you can no longer build with ghc (the compiler). But my
> memory of this is
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> Meanwhile, though, the best we can do is improve the documentation:
>
> Dan, can you suggest any words we could add to the
> documentation that would have prevented you stumbling?
... or even better - words that GHCi can say, when
| "For technical reasons, GHCi can only support the *-form for modules
| which are interpreted, so compiled modules and package modules can
| only contribute their exports to the current scope." But it does mean
| the interpreter isn't referentially transparent, which is weird for a
| language tha
Jules Bean wrote:
Laurent Deniau wrote:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
the FFT routines in MATLAB (FFTW: written in OCaml) and the SML
software
that The MathWorks sell.
I see, but FFTW was not developed by MathWorks, but by Matteo Frigo and
Steven G. Johnso
Henning Thielemann writes:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, Henning, it is quite a statement: "certainly not the appropriate
tools for reliable development and maintenance". Tell that to those
legions of people who made dozens of thousands of programs in Lisp (or
Scheme),
Laurent Deniau wrote:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 08:41, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
Penetration is highest in parts of industry where small groups of
talented programmers get together, most
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Bailey
>
> Well, I answered my own question. Unlike UNIX, specifying a library
> without the leading "lib" causes the library to not be found. Not sure
> if that's a GHC linking problem or what. Changing the library
> requi
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 08:41, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
Penetration is highest in parts of industry where small groups of
talented programmers get together, most notably startups. Look
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Henning Thielemann writes:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >> Henning Thielemann writes:
> >>
> >> > ?? Mathematica and MatLab are just the opposite of statically safe
> >> > programming.
> >>
> >> Is this a religious statement, quite popular in
Hello jerzy,
Tuesday, November 13, 2007, 3:03:16 PM, you wrote:
> Well, Henning, it is quite a statement: "certainly not the appropriate tools
> for reliable development and maintenance". Tell that to those legions of
> people who made dozens of thousands of programs in Lisp (or Scheme), in
> Sma
Peter Hercek wrote:
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| > Windows and Haskell is not a well travelled route, but if you
stray of
| > the cuddly installer packages, it gets even worse.
|
| But it shouldn't. Really it shouldn't. Even though Windows is not my
| preferred platform, it is by no means differ
Following Lennart Augustsson's improvements of the Haskell implementations of
my ray tracer language comparison:
http://augustss.blogspot.com/2007/11/benchmarking-ray-tracing-haskell-vs.html
I thought I'd share the performance improvements offered by Lennart's new code
with the latest release
Henning Thielemann writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Henning Thielemann writes:
> ?? Mathematica and MatLab are just the opposite of statically safe
> programming.
Is this a religious statement, quite popular in our Church of Functionalism,
or you mean something concrete by that, and if ye
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 November 2007 08:41, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > > Penetration is highest in parts of industry where small groups of
> > > talented programmers get together, most notably startups. Look at
> > > Xe
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Henning Thielemann writes:
>
> > ?? Mathematica and MatLab are just the opposite of statically safe
> > programming.
>
> Is this a religious statement, quite popular in our Church of Functionalism,
> or you mean something concrete by that, and if yes
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 08:41, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > Penetration is highest in parts of industry where small groups of
> > talented programmers get together, most notably startups. Look at
> > XenSource, Wolfram Research, The MathWorks,
>
> ?? Ma
Galchin Vasili wrote:
> I am looking for (objective.. i.e. not juts FPL cheerleading) opinions as to
> why Wall Street ( http://www.janestcapital.com/)
For Jane St Capital read the article by Yaron Minsky in issue 7
of the Monad Reader:
http://www.haskell.org/sitewiki/images/0/03/TMR-Issue7.
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Daniel McAllansmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone had done work on tagging functions at the type
> level
> with their time or space complexity and, if it's even feasible, calculating
> the complexity of compound functions.
>
> Any pointers?
I have
Henning Thielemann writes:
?? Mathematica and MatLab are just the opposite of statically safe
programming.
Is this a religious statement, quite popular in our Church of Functionalism,
or you mean something concrete by that, and if yes, then what?
Jerzy Karczmarczuk
___
"Neil Mitchell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I just removed GHC 6.6.1 and installed 6.8.1, and I noticed something
>> rather unexpected. I recompiled an existing program (with -O2), and
>> instead of taking 30 seconds to compile, it took roughly 2 seconds.
> In previous releases, certain constr
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
> Penetration is highest in parts of industry where small groups of talented
> programmers get together, most notably startups. Look at XenSource,
> Wolfram Research, The MathWorks,
?? Mathematica and MatLab are just the opposite of statically safe
programm
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Derek Elkins wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-11-12 at 15:51 -0800, Donn Cave wrote:
> > On Nov 12, 2007, at 12:00 PM, Galchin Vasili wrote:
> > > I am looking for (objective.. i.e. not juts FPL cheerleading)
> > > opinions as to why Wall Street ( http://www.janestcapital.com/) and
> >
71 matches
Mail list logo
