On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:04:22PM +1000, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 12:11:29PM +0200, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> > I think that C++ was a lot worse, even the accepted features (e.g. templates)
> > didn't work the same with all compilers. All non-trivial code came with a
> > li
G'day all.
On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 12:11:29PM +0200, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> I think that C++ was a lot worse, even the accepted features (e.g. templates)
> didn't work the same with all compilers. All non-trivial code came with a
> list of supported compilers.
True. If we had more Haskell imp
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 03:23:30PM +1000, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
> G'day all.
>
> On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 10:36:46PM -0400, Dylan Thurston wrote:
>
> > However, I would be sure to distinguish between an inner product space
> > and a vector space.
>
> That's true. If you're after a completely g
On Tuesday 29 July 2003 04:10, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
> There is no ISO standard Haskell. There is Haskell 98, but that was
> deliberately designed to be a simpler language than what came before
> it, with no experimental features, partly to make teaching the language
> easier. (You can't write
G'day all.
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 03:42:11PM +0200, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> What is the general attitude in the Haskell community towards
> compiler-specific extensions? My past experience with Fortran and C/C++ tells
> me to stay away from them. Portability is an important criterion for me.
T
At 15:40 28/07/03 +0200, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> This is beginning to get a little ugly, but I think that's largely
> because you're using type classes in too much of an OO style (this is
I am coming from OO indeed...
Me too.
Twice now I have used Haskell classes in a way suggested by an OO
progra
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 03:42:11PM +0200, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> On Friday 25 July 2003 21:48, Dylan Thurston wrote:
>
> > Another approach is to make Universe a multi-parameter type class:
> >
> > class (RealFrac a, Floating a) => Universe u a | u -> a where
> > distanceVector :: u -> Vector a
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 09:54:11 -0400 (EDT)
Mark Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It would be
> interesting to see a list of what people think will make it into
> Haskell 2 though.
http://haskell.org/hawiki/HaskellTwo
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[EMA
Konrad Hinsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> More fundamentally, I consider the module system in its present form a major
> weak point of Haskell. There is only one global module namespace, which
> therefore is a scarce resource. If, as I have seen proposed in some book, I
> use up a global modul
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> What is the general attitude in the Haskell community towards
> compiler-specific extensions? My past experience with Fortran and C/C++ tells
> me to stay away from them. Portability is an important criterion for me.
It depends which ones. Some are impl
On Friday 25 July 2003 21:48, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> Another approach is to make Universe a multi-parameter type class:
>
> class (RealFrac a, Floating a) => Universe u a | u -> a where
> distanceVector :: u -> Vector a -> Vector a -> Vector a
> ...
>
> You need to use ghc with '-fglasgow-exts'
> Well, I may not exactly qualify, but I can give you a few suggestions,
> nonetheless...
Thanks!
> > data Floating a => Vector a = Vector !a !a !a
> > deriving (Eq, Show)
>
> Here. Do not use 'data C x =>'. It's essentially a useless part of the
> language that really should have gone awa
G'day all.
On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 10:36:46PM -0400, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> However, I would be sure to distinguish between an inner product space
> and a vector space.
That's true. If you're after a completely generic solution, this might
be an issue.
> An inner product space has the 'innerP
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 11:59:48AM +1000, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
> G'day all.
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 03:48:15PM -0400, Dylan Thurston wrote:
>
> > Another approach is to make Universe a multi-parameter type class:
> >
> > class (RealFrac a, Floating a) => Universe u a | u -> a where
> >
G'day all.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 03:48:15PM -0400, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> Another approach is to make Universe a multi-parameter type class:
>
> class (RealFrac a, Floating a) => Universe u a | u -> a where
> distanceVector :: u -> Vector a -> Vector a -> Vector a
> ...
Actually, this is a
On Friday, 2003-07-25, 21:48, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> [...]
> Another approach is to make Universe a multi-parameter type class:
>
> class (RealFrac a, Floating a) => Universe u a | u -> a where
> distanceVector :: u -> Vector a -> Vector a -> Vector a
> ...
>
> You need to use ghc with '-fglasg
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 08:31:26AM -0700, Hal Daume wrote:
> However, once we fix this, we can see the real problem. Your Universe
> class has a method, distanceVector, of type:
>
> | distanceVector :: Universe u, Floating a => u -> Vector a -> Vector a
> -> Vector a
>
> And here's the problem.
Hi Konrad,
> I am a Haskell newbie working on my first serious test case,
> and I would like
> some feedback from the experts to make sure I am not doing
> anything stupid
> ;-)
Well, I may not exactly qualify, but I can give you a few suggestions,
nonetheless...
> data Floating a => Vector
I am a Haskell newbie working on my first serious test case, and I would like
some feedback from the experts to make sure I am not doing anything stupid
;-)
My applications are numerical (one goal of my current tests being to check how
much of a performance penalty I will pay for using Haskell
19 matches
Mail list logo
