Re: [Haskell-cafe] Type system madness
Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
Andrew Coppin wrote:
Oh well, the problem is easily fixed... *sigh*
I doubt that anybody minds having you talk about Haskell. You've been responsible for spawning a lot of interesting threads.
[And that one about compression that's still going on somewhere... lol!]
All I would suggest is that you take your cue from the other people who post to the list, and try a few tactics before you post:
- If you have a chatty one-line comment, do 2,000 other people need to see it?
Mmm. This is why I prefer NNTP. (If a thread becomes tangent, everybody just marks it "ignore" and they don't have to waste time downloading it or reading it.) But yeah, point taken...
- If you have a question to ask, try to spend 2 minutes with Google or the Haskell wiki to find the anwer.
I continue to be surprised at the things that don't seem to be on the Wiki... Google is typically no help at all with anything Haskell-related, because Haskell is so completely obscure. The various haddoc documentation is also frustratingly sparse in places. (E.g., Control.Concurrent.STM.TVar contains *nothing* but terse type signatures. And concurrent programming is already a tricky thing to get right.) Some things seem to be "well known" yet not actually written down anywhere - e.g., the finer points of using "seq" to make stuff go faster. But sure, I do like to try to puzzle a thing out first before posting here. (If something else, I kind of enjoy a challenge...)
- Join us on #haskell on IRC. It's extremely chatty, and you'll be welcome.
Not in my experience, no. (Maybe I ask the wrong way... but almost everybody seems to simply ignore me. Actually, usually when I go there absolutely nobody is speaking at all. What time zone do these people live in?)
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 08:57:58PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
Andrew Coppin wrote:
Oh well, the problem is easily fixed... *sigh*
I doubt that anybody minds having you talk about Haskell. You've been responsible for spawning a lot of interesting threads.
[And that one about compression that's still going on somewhere... lol!]
All I would suggest is that you take your cue from the other people who post to the list, and try a few tactics before you post:
- If you have a chatty one-line comment, do 2,000 other people need to see it?
Mmm. This is why I prefer NNTP. (If a thread becomes tangent, everybody just marks it "ignore" and they don't have to waste time downloading it or reading it.) But yeah, point taken...
- If you have a question to ask, try to spend 2 minutes with Google or the Haskell wiki to find the anwer.
I continue to be surprised at the things that don't seem to be on the Wiki... Google is typically no help at all with anything Haskell-related, because Haskell is so completely obscure. The various haddoc documentation is also frustratingly sparse in places. (E.g., Control.Concurrent.STM.TVar contains *nothing* but terse type signatures. And concurrent programming is already a tricky thing to get right.) Some things seem to be "well known" yet not actually written down anywhere - e.g., the finer points of using "seq" to make stuff go faster.
That's just a known haddock bug. Had you asked instead of suffering in silence, we would have told you that you can work around it by looking at the GHC.Conc docs.
But sure, I do like to try to puzzle a thing out first before posting here. (If something else, I kind of enjoy a challenge...)
- Join us on #haskell on IRC. It's extremely chatty, and you'll be welcome.
Not in my experience, no.
(Maybe I ask the wrong way... but almost everybody seems to simply ignore me. Actually, usually when I go there absolutely nobody is speaking at all. What time zone do these people live in?)
You were just unlucky. 50% of the time #haskell is silent, the other 50% it's intolerably noisy. Stefan
Stefan O'Rear wrote:
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 08:57:58PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
- Join us on #haskell on IRC. It's extremely chatty, and you'll be welcome.
Not in my experience, no.
(Maybe I ask the wrong way... but almost everybody seems to simply ignore me. Actually, usually when I go there absolutely nobody is speaking at all. What time zone do these people live in?)
You were just unlucky. 50% of the time #haskell is silent, the other 50% it's intolerably noisy.
...really? Mmm. Hence my comment about time zones... Almost every time I go in there, there's about 300+ idling, but only 2, maybe 3 people actually speaking...
andrewcoppin:
Stefan O'Rear wrote:
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 08:57:58PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
- Join us on #haskell on IRC. It's extremely chatty, and you'll be welcome.
Not in my experience, no.
(Maybe I ask the wrong way... but almost everybody seems to simply ignore me. Actually, usually when I go there absolutely nobody is speaking at all. What time zone do these people live in?)
You were just unlucky. 50% of the time #haskell is silent, the other 50% it's intolerably noisy.
...really?
Mmm. Hence my comment about time zones... Almost every time I go in there, there's about 300+ idling, but only 2, maybe 3 people actually speaking...
Pick your most active timezone: http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/irc/haskell-07.html Generally though, there's no quiet times. You'll usually find many people available. Late night US and UK time, and early morning UK time are fairly busy. -- Don
Andrew Coppin
I continue to be surprised at the things that don't seem to be on the Wiki... Google is typically no help at all with anything Haskell-related, because Haskell is so completely obscure. The various haddoc documentation is also frustratingly sparse in places. (E.g., Control.Concurrent.STM.TVar contains *nothing* but terse type signatures. And concurrent programming is already a tricky thing to get right.) Some things seem to be "well known" yet not actually written down anywhere - e.g., the finer points of using "seq" to make stuff go faster.
Hmm, given the apparant scarcity of information on the new wiki I'm not sure if this is relevant or not, but for some time we had the entire wiki blacklisted in robots.txt because some broken bot was trying to pull O(n^2) (where n is the number of revisions of a page) diffs per page... anyay, this kept it from being indexed by Google and so forth. Eventually we discovered that if we added a single question mark to robots.txt, we could blacklist page history (and diffs) without blacklisting actual pages.
participants (4)
-
Andrew Coppin -
dons＠cse.unsw.edu.au -
Samuel J.J.Bronson -
Stefan O'Rear