- Libraries - Haskell.org

building haddock?
by Malcolm Wallace 31 Jan '06

31 Jan '06

Quick question: how do I build Haddock from the darcs repo? Long version: Using Cabal as provided with ghc-6.4.1 gave me this error: $ ghc-6.4.1 --make Setup $ ./a.out configure --help a.out: Line 12: Unknown field 'data-files' So I tried to upgrade Cabal to a newer version. Following the instructions to the letter, there was some weirdness with compiler versions, but I did end up with a newer Cabal: $ cd cabal-1.1.3 $ ghc-pkg-6.4.1 unregister Cabal Saving old package config file... done. Writing new package config file... done. $ vi GNUMakefile # edit HC=ghc-6.4.1, HC_PKG=ghc-pkg-6.4.1 $ make install mkdir -p dist/tmp ghc-6.4.1 --make -Wall -fno-warn-unused-matches -cpp -i. -odir dist/tmp -hidir dist/tmp Setup.lhs -o setup ... ./setup configure --ghc --prefix=/usr/malcolm/local Configuring Cabal-1.1.3... configure: Using install prefix: /usr/malcolm/local configure: Using compiler: /grp/haskell/bin/ghc # this is wrong configure: Compiler flavor: GHC configure: Compiler version: 6.2.2 # eek! this is wrong configure: Using package tool: /grp/haskell/bin/ghc-pkg # this is wrong too ... ./setup install Installing: /usr/malcolm/local/lib/Cabal-1.1.3/ghc-6.2.2 & /usr/malcolm/local/bin Cabal-1.1.3... # installed for wrong compiler Registering Cabal-1.1.3... Reading package info from ".installed-pkg-config"done. Expanding embedded variables... done. Saving old package config file... done. Writing new package config file... done. # Cabal is missing from ghc-6.4.1 $ ghc-pkg-6.4.1 -l /usr/malcolm/local/lib/ghc-6.4.1/package.conf: rts-1.0, base-1.0, haskell98-1.0, template-haskell-1.0, unix-1.0, parsec-1.0, haskell-src-1.0, network-1.0, QuickCheck-1.0, HUnit-1.1, mtl-1.0, fgl-5.2, X11-1.1, HGL-3.1, OpenGL-2.0, GLUT-2.0, stm-1.0, readline-1.0, (lang-1.0), (concurrent-1.0), (posix-1.0), (util-1.0), (data-1.0), (text-1.0), (net-1.0), (hssource-1.0) # ...but is installed for ghc-6.2.2 $ ghc-pkg-6.2.2 -l /grp/haskell/lib/ghc-6.2.2/package.conf: rts, base, haskell98, haskell-src, network, parsec, QuickCheck, readline, unix, lang, concurrent, posix, util, data, text, net, hssource, hat, HaXml, wxcore, wx, Cabal But the killer is, it still doesn't work: $ cd haddock $ ghc-6.2.2 --make Setup -package Cabal Chasing modules from: Setup Compiling Main ( Setup.lhs, Setup.o ) Linking ... $ ./a.out t configure --help a.out: haddock.cabal:12: Unknown field 'data-files' So then I tried just building haddock directly with ghc: $ ghc-6.4 --make Main.hs Chasing modules from: Main.hs Main.hs:39:1: lexical error $ ghc-6.4 --make -cpp Main.hs Chasing modules from: Main.hs Could not find module `Paths_Haddock': use -v to see a list of the files searched for (imported from Main.hs) And now I'm stuck. There genuinely is no module called Paths_Haddock. Regards, Malcolm

4 5

RE: Idea to allow people to comment on Haskell docs
by Simon Peyton-Jones 29 Jan '06

29 Jan '06

| > Adding source code links would complete the picture. | | Done! | | Take a look at my example pages again: | http://haskell.org/gtk2hs/docs/devel/ | http://haskell.org/gtk2hs/docs/devel/Graphics-Rendering-Cairo-SVG.html | http://haskell.org/gtk2hs/docs/devel/Graphics-Rendering-Cairo-SVG.html#v :svgRender Excellent stuff! I didn't follow all the details of your message, but I notice that the source code link doesn't move to the defn, presumably because there's no anchor in the source file. I guess that would require munging the source files to add the anchors? Unless one can link to "Foo.hs line 424", somehow. Suppose I follow the Comments link from (say) withSvgFromFile, and add some comments. Will they automatically get the right anchor? Because all the comments for SVG (rightly) end up in a single file, don't they? This looks great. (Don't forget the documentation for Haddock itself. Documenting the feature makes it much more likely that people will use it.) Simon

3 2

list sorting
by John Meacham 25 Jan '06

25 Jan '06

is there a function floating around for _efficiently_ sorting a list of lists that will not evaluate any more of the lists than is needed to sort them properly and does not re-compare the common prefix of said lists? as in, sortLists :: Ord a => [[a]] -> [[a]] sortLists = ... if it proves faster in the general case than 'sort', then a RULES pragma might be in order to use it instead when sorting lists. a very common case being sorting strings. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈

4 4

RE: Idea to allow people to comment on Haskell docs
by Simon Peyton-Jones 23 Jan '06

23 Jan '06

| They will get the right anchor if people follow the convention of using | headings for each function they want to add notes about. In the wiki | markup that means writing: | | = withSvgFromFile = Aha. It'd be good if the text they see when they are about to start editing a blank comment file gave them exactly this advice. Don't know if that is possible, but that's the moment they'll need it! Simon

2 1

Re: [Haskell] duplicate elements in Data.Set
by Jean-Philippe Bernardy 22 Jan '06

22 Jan '06

I'd say your compare function isn't transitive. If you can tell it's well behaved, and if you can send me even your complicated example, I'll look into it. Cheers, JP. On 1/21/06, Walter Moreira <gwallter(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello list. Are there situations where a set can contain duplicate > elements? > > I have a newtype and it is an instance of 'Eq' via the 'compare' method, > and it is also an instance of 'Ord'. After some Data.Set operations > with sets of that type I get a set which contains two elements which > compare equal. What am I doing wrong? > > The function 'Set.valid' returns 'False' when applied to the set. I > use the function 'Set.fromList' sometimes. Is it supposed to always > yield a valid set? or it may depend on the order or equality? > > Sorry the question is a little vague. When I try to construct small > examples the problem disappear. > > Thanks, > Walter > _______________________________________________ > Haskell mailing list > Haskell(a)haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell >

2 1

RE: Idea to allow people to comment on Haskell docs
by Simon Peyton-Jones 21 Jan '06

21 Jan '06

I think it looks great! Just the job, thank you. Did you modify the Haddock documentation too? One thing to think about is what happens as the code evolves. When you re-generate the Haddock docs, what happens? Since the links are done by name (I think) it's probably not bad: you get links to the existing wiki entries so long as the name of the function doesn't change. If a function is deleted, I guess there'll be an orphan wiki entry, but that's probably ok. Worth documenting this in the Haddock docs. Adding source code links would complete the picture. Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Duncan Coutts [mailto:duncan.coutts@worc.ox.ac.uk] | Sent: 19 January 2006 21:55 | To: Simon Peyton-Jones | Cc: Haskell Libraries | Subject: RE: Idea to allow people to comment on Haskell docs | | On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 09:01 +0000, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: | > It looks great! But I'd never have found the link if you hadn't pointed | > me at it. | > | > Rather than "Wiki" say "User comments". | | Done. | | > And I think the per-entry [User comment] link is essential. Typically | > people are going to be looking at a particular thing. For example, here | > | > http://haskell.org/gtk2hs/docs/devel/Graphics-Rendering-Cairo-SVG.html#v :svgRenderFromString | > is where I'd look for the link for svgRenderFromString. | | Done! | | So take another look at these example pages: | http://haskell.org/gtk2hs/docs/devel/ | http://haskell.org/gtk2hs/docs/devel/Graphics-Rendering-Cairo-SVG.html | | For the per-entry links, to conserve space I've just said [Comments] | rather than [User Comments] and used a smaller font. These cosmetic | things are easy to change if anyone complains. | | I've sent the haddock patches that implement this stuff to Simon Marlow, | so if people are generally favourable of this iteration of the patch | perhaps he'd like to apply it. :-) I hope I've done the changes in such | a way that it should be straightforward to add source code links too | if/when haddock is taught how to find the original source file for each | module. | | So, opinions? | | Duncan

2 2

Re: Who needs Ord for Sets and Maps anyway?
by Okasaki, C. DR EECS 20 Jan '06

20 Jan '06

Adrian Hey wrote: > Well, speaking of "non-trivial comparisons" reminds me of something > that's been worrying me about this whole approach to implementing > Sets and Maps. I.E. Requiring that element/key types are instances > of Ord and assuming that lookup etc is achieved by performing some > kind of binary search. > > This seems wrong in general. [...] and > This also highlights another reason why IMO specifying "biasing" > is bad, because doing this implicitly assumes that Sets/Maps somehow > contain concrete structural representations of elements/keys. > This is not necessarily so. It's not true with any implementation > like that described above (or even simple tries). You've just highlighted why the collections hierarchy in Edison was a lattice of 8 classes. Basically, there are two choices in each of three different dimensions: 1. The set/map distinction 2. Require Ord or don't (your first point above) 3. "Observable" or not (your second point above) I think the last point is the one that caused the most confusion, but it is exactly the issue you highlight above -- some structures contain the actual elements/keys, but some (such as tries or sets based on bitmaps) don't. The non-observable parts of the hierarchy are there precisely to support implementations like tries and bitmaps where it is not easy to get your hands on the actual elements. -- Chris

11 21

RE: Idea to allow people to comment on Haskell docs
by Simon Peyton-Jones 20 Jan '06

20 Jan '06

| I guess the question is if people will actually start commenting on | functions. So I would vote for the addition to haddock and see what is | happening. Maybe we need then need to gather statistics about what links | are clicked most and check which ones of these are empty (and left the | user frustrated). That reminds me. One very useful, but probably hard-to-implement, feature would be if the "User comment" link looked different if there were actually some comments at the other end of the link. "Is it worth clicking this?" thinks the user. Kind of like Amazon, which says "Click here to see 4 user reviews" or "Write the first review". Simon

3 2

Re: Who needs Ord for Sets and Maps anyway?
by Okasaki, C. DR EECS 17 Jan '06

17 Jan '06

[My sincere apologies for the multiple posts. I forgot to include the subject line on my previous post, which makes it unclickable in the archive...] I wrote: > You've just highlighted why the collections hierarchy in Edison was a > lattice of 8 classes. Basically, there are two choices in each of > three different dimensions: > > 1. The set/map distinction > 2. Require Ord or don't (your first point above) 3. "Observable" or > not (your second point above) Oops, I typed too fast. Edison actually has two choices in each of four different dimensions. The first is the set/map distinction, but those are in two separate class hierarchies. Within each of those class hierarchies, the three dimensions are Ord/not, Observable/not, and "unique"/not, where the last dimension is the difference between sets and bags. -- Chris

1 0

Re:
by Okasaki, C. DR EECS 17 Jan '06

17 Jan '06

I wrote: > You've just highlighted why the collections hierarchy in > Edison was a lattice of 8 classes. Basically, there are > two choices in each of three different dimensions: > > 1. The set/map distinction > 2. Require Ord or don't (your first point above) > 3. "Observable" or not (your second point above) Oops, I typed too fast. Edison actually has two choices in each of four different dimensions. The first is the set/map distinction, but those are in two separate class hierarchies. Within each of those class hierarchies, the three dimensions are Ord/not, Observable/not, and "unique"/not, where the last dimension is the difference between sets and bags. -- Chris

1 0