Re: [Haskell-cafe] Fighting research paper bit-rot

Wow. Learning that there's anyone out there who finds this useful is one thing.. getting that after 3 minutes is another level of satisfying :) On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Patrick Mylund Nielsen wrote:

Thanks, this had me pretty confused too. STM.check itself also differs from in earlier versions of the library where it returned () or undefined.

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:35 PM, cheater cheater wrote:

...

Hi guys, after yet another episode of trying to figure out why library code doesn't make any sense when reading the related paper, I decided to start a small wiki just for the purpose of describing differences between what's in the paper and what's in the code.

The first article can be found at:

http://functionalpapersupdated.wikia.com/wiki/Transactional_memory_with_data...

This one was tricky: it was the "check" from stm-invariants.pdf. There is a "check" in the STM library which is a completely different function. The "check" from the paper is in another module and library and is called "alwaysSucceeds".

Everyone's more than welcome to add their favourite papers and describe the differences. The wiki is freely editable.

Hopefully it can, with time, grow to be of help to anyone trying to learn about Haskell or category theory or functional programming in general.

I can't promise a huge amount of updates on my side (I'm just a guy learning how to use Haskell, not a researcher) but hopefully this great community can make it happen :)

If you're a publishing author, and you know of such updates to your papers, please consider starting a page for your paper. It's also a good place to track the implementations of ideas described in such papers, especially in case there are multiple ones or the implementation hasn't been discussed in the paper itself.

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe