- Haskell - Haskell.org

Hugs-on-Windows: rebuild for larger programs
by Graham Klyne 05 Jan '04

05 Jan '04

Following my earlier message, I've posted a rebuild of Hugs.exe for MS-Windows, with quadrupled code storage allocation, at: http://www.ninebynine.org/Software/FatHugs.html #g ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact

1 0

RE: safe array freezing?
by Simon Marlow 05 Jan '04

05 Jan '04

> so, A common idiom when using Control.Monad.ST is to do some > complicated, state using computation to compute a big array which is > then used purely functionally as a read-only array in the rest of the > program. > > to avoid the cost of copying the array at the end, we are > forced to use > 'unsafeFreeze'. it occurs to me that this particular idiom > can actually > be done safely, by adding the following... > > runSTArray :: (forall s . (ST s (STArray s i e))) -> Array i e > runSTUArray :: (forall s . (ST s (STUArray s i e))) -> UArray i e Good idea. I'll add these to Data.Array.ST. Cheers, Simon

1 0

Large programs in Hugs-2003 on Windows
by Graham Klyne 05 Jan '04

05 Jan '04

I've just run into a problem with Hugs-2003 on Windows, where I get the following message: [[ ERROR "D:\Cvs\DEV\HaskellRDF\N3FormatterTest.hs" - Program code storage space exhausted ]] (This is attempting to load a consolidated test harness, so there genuinely is a lot of Haskell code here, for all the unit test cases.) A look around the web suggests that this is due to a predefined limit in Hugs, which requires a recompilation to change. I'm in the process of downloading the source, to look at this. But meanwhile, I have three questions: - am I right, or am I overlooking an option to allow larger programs? (I tried increasing the heap.) Assuming I am right: - does anyone already have a build of Hugs for Windows that can handle larger programs, available for download? (I use the console version, rather than WinHugs -- I tried WinHugs, but that just throws up unexpected syntax errors.) - can anyone point me to instructions for building Hugs on Windows using a freely available compiler? (I have only very old versions of the Microsoft C development software.) #g ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact

1 0

Haddock and man pages
by Per Larsson 02 Jan '04

02 Jan '04

Hi, When you have a good understanding of a programming library and only need to quickly refresh your memory regarding the type signature of a specific function, etc., I find man pages very convenient. Are there any plans of adding this as an alternative output format in Haddock? If not, maybe I will try to write a patch when I find some spare time, but it would be encouraging to know if this would interest anyone else but myself? Cheers Per

3 2

Haddock and module properties
by Wolfgang Jeltsch 02 Jan '04

02 Jan '04

Hello, the sources of the hierarchical libraries contain things like Portability : portable in the module descriptions. Some of these property descriptions make it into the HTML documentation, some not. I'm looking for a documentation about these things. Why doesn't the Haddock User Guide describe them? Wolfgang

2 1

Working haskell/db+hugs set?
by kyra 02 Jan '04

02 Jan '04

Trying to play with haskell/db, I've found myself being a little bit stuck. The latest version of hugs haskell/db (as referenced from http://www.haskell.org/haskellDB/download.html) works with seems to be of May 1999. I cannot find any references to this version of hugs except http://www.cs.uu.nl/~daan/download/hugs98may.exe which is broken. Is it possible to find somewhere in the net all neccessary components (older hugs, newer haskelldb, whatever...) to run any haskelldb example? With best regards and Happy New Year! Kyra

3 3

no continuations
by Scott 01 Jan '04

01 Jan '04

Why does Haskell have no continuations? (http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/CoMonad) If continuations are incompatible with non-strict semantics, I'd appreciate an explanation.

6 7

safe array freezing?
by John Meacham 31 Dec '03

31 Dec '03

so, A common idiom when using Control.Monad.ST is to do some complicated, state using computation to compute a big array which is then used purely functionally as a read-only array in the rest of the program. to avoid the cost of copying the array at the end, we are forced to use 'unsafeFreeze'. it occurs to me that this particular idiom can actually be done safely, by adding the following... runSTArray :: (forall s . (ST s (STArray s i e))) -> Array i e runSTUArray :: (forall s . (ST s (STUArray s i e))) -> UArray i e now, since these discard 's' and hence the ability to modify the arrays they return, they may safely use the final arrays directly as if they were immutable. the routines are also very easy to implement: runSTArray st = runST $ st >>= unsafeFreeze runSTUArray st = runST $ st >>= unsafeFreeze so, is my logic correct? that runSTArray and runSTUArray need not be considered unsafe? if so, perhaps we should add these (or some better generalization that someone comes up with) to the standard libraries, as it would be nice to be able to use this idiom without resorting to trickery. (well, user visible trickery at least) John -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Meacham - California Institute of Technology, Alum. - john(a)foo.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

long lines of code with Haddock
by Wolfgang Jeltsch 31 Dec '03

31 Dec '03

Hello, Haddock 0.6 produces output where code generated from non-comment source (like the declarations in the synopsis) is not split across multiple lines. Since my type declarations are rather long, the Haddock-produced lines get much larger than my screen when shown in a web browser. How can I make Haddock split these lines and maybe even indenting lines to produce a nice layout? The documentation of the hierarchical libraries seems to use an automatic line breaking feature. Wolfgang

2 1

efficiency of FiniteMap and Set
by Wolfgang Jeltsch 31 Dec '03

31 Dec '03

Hello, is there some documentation about the complexity of the FiniteMap and Set operations? Wolfgang

2 1