On 8/5/2013 2:48 PM, Roman Cheplyaka wrote:
I am pleased to announce the first release of tasty, a new testing
framework for Haskell. It is meant to be a successor to test-framework
(which is unmaintained).
Tasty supports HUnit, SmallCheck, QuickCheck, and golden tests out of
the box (through th
On 8/7/2013 11:00 AM, David Thomas wrote:
twice :: IO () -> IO ()
twice x = x >> x
I would call that evaluating x twice (incidentally creating two
separate evaluations of one pure action description), but I'd like to
better see your perspective here.
x is only evaluated once, but /executed/
On 8/19/2013 2:43 PM, Ketil Malde wrote:
Joe Q writes:
This is definitely an issue with the array package not setting the right
minimum versions. You should email the maintainer.
Yes, that would be the thing to do, except that the maintainer is
"librar...@haskell.org", whom I believe does not
On 2/28/2013 11:17 PM, Chris Wong wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Corentin Dupont
>wrote:
>>Hi Chris,
>>Thanks!
>>That's true for the user number. What should I do? Encrypt it?
>
>It's not that you have a user number, or even that it's accessible: it's
>that it's the entirety of access
From what I have heard, they are completely subsumed by GADTs, which is
a stable enough extension that it was considered unimportant to save.
Your Foo would be something like this:
data Foo a where
Foo :: Eq a => a -> Foo a
On 4/25/2013 6:38 AM, harry wrote:
If I understand correctly, the
If you are feeling brave, you can also bootstrap GHC. For operating
systems that are already supported, it should not be too hard.
Last time I tried on a fresh install of Debian, the process was to
install the dependencies, and then something like this:
sh configure
make
make install
Disclaime
And we can have something on hackage that does this check automatically!
And we can put "unmaintained" in the description! And then we can leave
it unmaintained!
"Unmaintained" should have its own flag, I think...
On 5/5/2013 2:28 PM, Petr Pudlák wrote:
I'd say:
- If a package has UNMAINTAINE
On 6/7/2013 4:51 PM, Tom Ellis wrote:
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 04:05:09PM -0400, Joe Q wrote:
The phantom parameter solves the same problem as scoped type variables.
Granted, if you find yourself in that kind of polymorphic soup you have
deeper problems...
I don't understand this. Scoped type v
