On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 08:47:39AM +0200, Michael Snoyman wrote:
>> By the way, a native zlib implementation would definitely go on my
>> wishlist. Any takers? ;)
>
> Me too ! that's the only thing that prevented me from adding the compress
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/9/10 09:17 , Malcolm Wallace wrote:
>
> On 8 Oct 2010, at 16:56, Donn Cave wrote:
>
>> wikipedia: "Managed code is a differentiation coined by Microsoft to
>>identify computer program code that requires and will only execute
>>under th
* Donn Cave:
> Quoth Florian Weimer ,
>
>>> wikipedia: "Managed code is a differentiation coined by Microsoft to
>>> identify computer program code that requires and will only execute
>>> under the "management" of a Common Language Runtime virtual machine
>>> (resulting in Bytecode)."
On 8 Oct 2010, at 16:56, Donn Cave wrote:
wikipedia: "Managed code is a differentiation coined by Microsoft to
identify computer program code that requires and will only execute
under the "management" of a Common Language Runtime virtual machine
(resulting in Bytecode)."
In other wor
Quoth Florian Weimer ,
>> wikipedia: "Managed code is a differentiation coined by Microsoft to
>> identify computer program code that requires and will only execute
>> under the "management" of a Common Language Runtime virtual machine
>> (resulting in Bytecode)."
>
> I like this term
* Donn Cave:
> wikipedia: "Managed code is a differentiation coined by Microsoft to
> identify computer program code that requires and will only execute
> under the "management" of a Common Language Runtime virtual machine
> (resulting in Bytecode)."
I like this term, I apply it by e
Quoth Bas van Dijk ,
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
...
>> I can see how this terminology makes sense, but it's the opposite of
>> the usage in Java (where "native" == "unmanaged code called via JNI").
>
> I guess it depends on the context. If the context is a C program th
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Vincent Hanquez:
>
>> Native means the implementation is in haskell, and the library is
>> not using another implementation (in another language) to do the
>> work: either through FFI as a binding, or as a wrapper to an
>> external program.
* Vincent Hanquez:
> Native means the implementation is in haskell, and the library is
> not using another implementation (in another language) to do the
> work: either through FFI as a binding, or as a wrapper to an
> external program.
I can see how this terminology makes sense, but it's the opp
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 08:47:39AM +0200, Michael Snoyman wrote:
> By the way, a native zlib implementation would definitely go on my
> wishlist. Any takers? ;)
Me too ! that's the only thing that prevented me from adding the compression
layer to TLS. as such it's on my todo list, but really reall
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 11:14:01AM +0530, C K Kashyap wrote:
> Does native mean "Haskell only" - without FFI?
Native means the implementation is in haskell, and the library is not using
another implementation (in another language) to do the work: either through FFI
as a binding, or as a wrapper to
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Christopher Done
wrote:
> On 8 October 2010 07:44, C K Kashyap wrote:
>> Does native mean "Haskell only" - without FFI?
>
> I think "not Haskell" would be piping to a separate non-Haskell
> process or calling by FFI to another language to do the interesting
> work.
On 8 October 2010 07:44, C K Kashyap wrote:
> Does native mean "Haskell only" - without FFI?
I think "not Haskell" would be piping to a separate non-Haskell
process or calling by FFI to another language to do the interesting
work. Thus "native" is not using these for the interesting work. E.g.
I
Does native mean "Haskell only" - without FFI?
--
Regards,
Kashyap
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 12:29:51AM +0200, Christopher Done wrote:
> On 6 October 2010 23:26, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
> > I'ld like to announce the tls package [1][2], which is a native
> > implementation
> > of the TLS protocol, client and server. It's currently mostly supporting
> > SSL3,
> > T
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Christopher Done
wrote:
> On 6 October 2010 23:26, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
>> I'ld like to announce the tls package [1][2], which is a native
>> implementation
>> of the TLS protocol, client and server. It's currently mostly supporting
>> SSL3,
>> TLS1.0 and TLS
On 6 October 2010 23:26, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
> I'ld like to announce the tls package [1][2], which is a native implementation
> of the TLS protocol, client and server. It's currently mostly supporting
> SSL3,
> TLS1.0 and TLS1.1. It's got *lots* of rough edges, and a bunch of unsupported
> f
Hi haskellers,
I'ld like to announce the tls package [1][2], which is a native implementation
of the TLS protocol, client and server. It's currently mostly supporting SSL3,
TLS1.0 and TLS1.1. It's got *lots* of rough edges, and a bunch of unsupported
features, but it's humming along, and at each
18 matches
Mail list logo
