Chris Smith 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
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 wrote:
>>
>>> Laziness at the value level causes space leaks,
>>
>> This is well-worn folklore, but a bit misleading.
>
> :-) Like permanent m
On 29/04/2011, at 6:08 PM, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
> On 29 Apr 2011, at 05:38, Ben Lippmeier 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. It's not
a ta
On 29 Apr 2011, at 05:38, Ben Lippmeier 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 languages, and I am not
c
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Gregg Reynolds wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Ben Lippmeier 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 find a way to support laziness
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 07:19, Gracjan Polak 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 really do dynami
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Ben Lippmeier 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 space leak
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
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
wrote:
>
> I like to apply for the quote of the week. :-)
>
> "If Has
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.) Th
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Dan Doel 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 wrote:
> > I don't see any problem with this. Although I usual
(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 wrote:
> I don't see any problem with this. Although I usually have a bottom-up
> approach, so I don't do this too often
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
On Apr 28, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Ertugrul Soeylemez wrote:
Gracjan Polak wrote:
Ketil Malde 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
On Apr 28, 2011 9:25 AM, "Ertugrul Soeylemez" 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'
> >
Gracjan Polak wrote:
> Ketil Malde 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
Ketil Malde 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 bother
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.
Hask
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
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 loop
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. (...)
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
2011/4/27 MigMit :
> 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 term-level.
However Pytho
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
написал(а):
>
> I like to apply for the quote of the week. :-)
>
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 l
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
2011/4/27 Ketil Malde :
> Henning Thielemann 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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haskell_%28program
Henning Thielemann 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 objection,
namely that Pyth
2011/4/27 Henning Thielemann :
>
> 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
> expressi
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 prov
30 matches
Mail list logo
