|
0
|
1 2003-04-20.txt:01:42:06: <lament> Something like Haskell
|
|
|
2 2003-07-01.txt:11:16:20: <Taaus> This programming contest is being conducted by ICFP, which implies a desire to promote functional languages. However, rather than debate the definition of a "functional programming language," we will allow submitted programs to be written in any language whatsoever. Mixing languages is entirely acceptable; perhaps you will write in O'Caml and Haskell, with a Tcl script to do the gluing.
|
|
|
3 2004-01-26.txt:23:50:23: * Taaus-dvorak has moved on to Haskell these days.
|
|
|
4 2004-02-11.txt:00:15:20: <fizzie> oh, apparently I've written a semi-working (no 'g' or 'p') interpreter in 31 lines of haskell.
|
|
|
5 2004-04-18.txt:14:08:13: -!- shapr has quit ("fixing haskell-mode, brb").
|
|
|
6 2004-04-30.txt:07:47:16: <heatsink> I think it was something like, the text listed programming languages (C, Scheme, Haskell, Brainfudge[1])
|
|
|
7 2004-10-01.txt:04:05:41: <lament> shapr: it's not like Haskell is in any danger...
|
|
|
8 2004-10-01.txt:04:06:15: <shapr> wasn't talking about Haskell
|
|
|
9 2004-12-14.txt:06:52:46: <heatsink> why can't you shoot self in foot with python or haskell?
|
|
|
10 2004-12-25.txt:14:09:23: <fizzie> That's what I did with FORTRAN and Forth. And Haskell.
|
|
|
11 2005-06-02.txt:20:34:35: <jix> it's inspired by bf and haskell
|
|
|
12 2005-07-18.txt:18:02:20: <jix> it's my 2nd functional programming language (the first one was haskell and i used it only for a day)
|
|
|
13 2005-07-26.txt:07:13:31: <int-e> it's written in haskell, I compiled it using ghc, usage is bf2c < brainfuck-source > c-source. no options.
|
|
|
14 2005-08-04.txt:19:59:45: <lament> but i was thinking more like haskell-style
|
|
|
15 2005-08-05.txt:20:07:21: <int-e> hmm. maybe we should use \ for lambda like the Haskell folks.
|
|
|
16 2005-08-12.txt:22:34:09: <liebestraume> there's people who speak swedish in #haskell, you could ask them :)
|
|
|
17 2005-08-27.txt:20:21:05: <lament> what about unlambda (or haskell?) no instruction takes multiple operands :)
|
|
|
18 2005-09-09.txt:16:50:42: * grim_ prefers haskell
|
|
|
19 2005-09-09.txt:16:50:57: <jix> haskell is a nice language too
|
|
|
20 2005-09-09.txt:16:51:51: <nooga> haskell suxx
|
|
|
21 2005-09-09.txt:16:52:14: <jix> nooga: writing webframeworks in haskell sucks
|
|
|
22 2005-09-09.txt:16:52:20: <nooga> all i know about haskell is that it's an old, academic language ;p
|
|
|
23 2005-09-09.txt:16:53:22: <jix> haskell has some pretty cool things.. like generating a list of ALL prime numbers and print the first 10
|
|
|
24 2005-09-09.txt:16:53:32: <jix> that was my first usefull haskell program
|
|
|
25 2005-09-09.txt:16:55:14: <jix> one of my first haskell programs: http://rafb.net/paste/results/TzQvS266.html
|
|
|
26 2005-09-24.txt:16:11:42: <jix> haskell is a funny language
|
|
|
27 2005-10-23.txt:21:01:23: <cpressey> right now i'm learning haskell.
|
|
|
28 2005-10-23.txt:21:01:30: <CXI> haskell is a fun language
|
|
|
29 2005-10-23.txt:21:05:08: <lament> haskell is amazing :)
|
|
|
30 2005-10-28.txt:04:02:21: <lament> at least, python is what i actually write stuff in. Haskell, Smalltalk or whatever is what i would use if i were smarter.
|
|
|
31 2005-10-28.txt:04:03:09: <duerig> *crosses himself* You shouldn't mention the term 'Haskell'. Just refer to it as the 'Scottish language'. Don't you know that it is evil? That it is cursed?!?!? :-)
|
|
|
32 2005-10-28.txt:04:04:19: <lament> anyway, in haskell anything can be an operator
|
|
|
33 2005-10-28.txt:04:06:31: <lament> yeah but ocaml is like haskell for dummies.
|
|
|
34 2005-10-28.txt:04:07:46: <duerig> I once took a class on 'practical functional programming'. We were allowed to choose our own language for the course. Only one person was brave enough to pick Haskell. He showed us his code once and all our eyes bugged out.
|
|
|
35 2005-10-28.txt:04:08:43: <Arrogant> Haskell is pretty esoteric <3
|
|
|
36 2005-10-28.txt:04:09:29: <Arrogant> Haskell is a great language though.
|
|
|
37 2005-10-28.txt:04:10:00: <lament> scheme and haskell are both conceptually pretty, but scheme is ugly in practice
|
|
|
38 2005-11-01.txt:03:35:57: <Arrogant> Actually, that article reminds me of Haskell.
|
|
|
39 2005-11-06.txt:16:14:56: <int-e> compare to Haskell:
|
|
|
40 2005-11-10.txt:22:26:11: <ihope> I just set up Haskell to do SKI-combinator calculus.
|
|
|
41 2005-11-11.txt:01:50:59: <ihope> Eh, infinite types in Haskell. Can it be done?
|
|
|
42 2005-11-12.txt:03:29:02: <ihope> I suddenly want to write a Haskell-to-Lazy K compiler.
|
|
|
43 2005-11-12.txt:03:30:52: <ihope> It'd probably be done in an imperative language until I get Haskell down.
|
|
|
44 2005-11-22.txt:00:20:28: <ihope> Well, I'm writing one in Haskell...
|
|
|
45 2005-11-22.txt:01:19:07: <ihope> Is there any Haskell builtin to test whether a list contains a specified value?
|
|
|
46 2005-11-23.txt:20:58:52: <ihope> Haskell?
|
|
|
47 2005-11-23.txt:21:00:29: <calamari> is haskell free software? not seeing a debian package for it
|
|
|
48 2005-11-23.txt:21:07:00: <lindi-> calamari: apt-cache search haskell finds 69 packages
|
|
|
49 2005-11-23.txt:21:07:44: <calamari> lindi-: weird.. must be Ubuntu then.. I have all sorts of haskell docs and things, but no haskell itself
|
|
|
50 2005-11-23.txt:21:07:59: <lindi-> haskell is a language
|
|
|
51 2005-11-23.txt:21:08:21: <GregorR> ghaskell? :P
|
|
|
52 2005-11-23.txt:21:08:34: <ihope> Haskell -> Lazy K?
|
|
|
53 2005-11-23.txt:21:08:35: <lindi-> ghc-cvs - GHC - the Glasgow Haskell Compilation system ?
|
|
|
54 2005-11-25.txt:20:21:59: <ihope> I'm slowly converting Haskell's getLine function into Lazy K.
|
|
|
55 2005-11-25.txt:22:23:42: <jix> haskell?
|
|
|
56 2005-11-25.txt:22:24:25: <jix> lazy evaluation is funny.. i wrote a haskell code to generate a list with ALL primes in it...
|
|
|
57 2005-11-25.txt:22:25:52: <jix> i told haskell to print the list AFTER generating them... you can't do that without lazy evaluation
|
|
|
58 2005-11-26.txt:00:46:58: <ihope> Ook! I just realized Haskell's imperative composition thingamajig is "tricky". Then again, maybe not.
|
|
|
59 2005-11-26.txt:00:58:13: <ihope> Yep. I think Haskell's "imperatives" aren't compatible with those of Lazy K.
|
|
|
60 2005-11-26.txt:15:58:49: <ihope> I decided once again that Haskell's IO types are not compatible with Lazy K programs.
|
|
|
61 2005-11-26.txt:18:50:43: <calamari> I translated that pi program.. it was originally Haskell, someone converted it to Ruby, then I converted it to Python and finally to Linguine
|
|
|
62 2005-11-27.txt:13:26:51: <jix> haskell too
|
|
|
63 2005-11-28.txt:15:38:30: <ihope> How about imperative, a la Haskell?
|
|
|
64 2005-11-28.txt:15:38:52: <Gs30ng> haskell is a stack-based imperative language
|
|
|
65 2005-11-28.txt:15:39:06: <jix> haskell isn't stack based
|
|
|
66 2005-11-28.txt:15:39:09: <jix> and haskell is functinal
|
|
|
67 2005-11-28.txt:15:39:23: <ihope> Haskell's do notation looks imperative :-)
|
|
|
68 2005-11-28.txt:15:39:38: <Gs30ng> a haskell code
|
|
|
69 2005-11-28.txt:15:41:21: <Gs30ng> is a reversed haskell code.
|
|
|
70 2005-11-28.txt:15:41:47: <jix> Gs30ng: haskell uses currifizing arguments that's why it looks like stack based but it isn't
|
|
|
71 2005-11-28.txt:15:43:58: <jix> the 2nd paragraph says it's different from functional languages like haskell
|
|
|
72 2005-11-28.txt:15:48:27: <jix> in functional programming there is no evaluation order.. (that's why haskell uses monads)
|
|
|
73 2005-11-28.txt:15:51:36: <Gs30ng> well, without any care of classes, monads, defining functions... state a language with reversed order of haskell
|
|
|
74 2005-11-28.txt:15:55:25: <ihope> But I'd like to make it so Lazy K's programs are compatible with Haskell's IO types.
|
|
|
75 2005-12-01.txt:00:24:53: <ihope> I'm having a simple problem with Haskell, and am off to deploy it at #haskell.
|
|
|
76 2005-12-08.txt:01:54:28: <ihope> I'm writing a Haskell program that will write a Foobar program that will output the 99 bottles of beer song.
|
|
|
77 2005-12-14.txt:11:18:54: <handongseong> taking some ideas from haskell (monad)
|
|
|
78 2005-12-17.txt:01:10:25: <ihope> I'm writing a Smurf interpreter in Haskell.
|
|
|
79 2005-12-20.txt:15:11:35: <Gs30ng> Haskell, Python, and Ruby was good ones for me
|
|
|
80 2005-12-20.txt:15:12:10: <nooga> hm, dont know Haskell
|
|
|
81 2005-12-20.txt:15:17:55: <Gs30ng> and Haskell is far away
|
|
|
82 2005-12-20.txt:15:18:01: <jix> haskell is cool ;)
|
|
|
83 2005-12-20.txt:15:28:00: <Gs30ng> haskell is more clean
|
|
|
84 2005-12-20.txt:15:36:48: <Gs30ng> haskell prefers the former(and you can use latter if you want)
|
|
|
85 2005-12-21.txt:19:13:14: <ihope> Stuff like that's why I like Haskell.
|
|
|
86 2005-12-22.txt:21:30:38: <ihope> Well, I calculated ack(4,2) in Haskell.
|
|
|
87 2005-12-22.txt:21:40:19: <ihope> This is sort of funny. Haskell is computing ack(4,2)... over and over again.
|
|
|
88 2006-01-04.txt:20:53:07: <ihope> I'm trying to write a Haskell interpreter for it. Treeky, it is.
|
|
|
89 2006-01-04.txt:22:58:42: <ihope> It seemed to take a few minutes. I love Haskell :-)
|
|
|
90 2006-01-11.txt:00:20:24: <SimonRC> How about Haskell?
|
|
|
91 2006-01-11.txt:00:21:19: <GregorR> Not hah to Haskell.
|
|
|
92 2006-01-11.txt:00:21:20: <GregorR> Haskell rocks.
|
|
|
93 2006-01-13.txt:23:28:42: <SimonRC> things like Scheme and Haskell are both of these.
|
|
|
94 2006-01-13.txt:23:28:58: <SimonRC> Being non-declarative is practiacally impossible in Haskell.
|
|
|
95 2006-01-13.txt:23:30:43: <fizzie> Oh, it's certainly _possible_ to write ugly non-declarative-like code in Haskell.
|
|
|
96 2006-01-13.txt:23:30:56: <SimonRC> *cough* http://haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/base/Data-IORef.html *cough*
|
|
|
97 2006-01-14.txt:18:42:35: <ihope> Like Haskell, sorta?
|
|
|
98 2006-01-14.txt:18:43:44: <SimonRC> so + doesn;t have a Haskell type, really
|
|
|
99 2006-01-15.txt:02:27:50: <SimonRC> Use Haskell!
|
|
|
100 2006-01-15.txt:02:37:15: <SimonRC> I will want currying, though, like Haskell has.
|
|
|
101 2006-01-16.txt:11:34:01: <SimonRC> Grrr, Haskell professor sent out patch that doesn't actually correct the probel *at* *all*.
|
|
|
102 2006-01-16.txt:19:52:52: <SimonRC> Hmm, Haskell is suprisingly powerful.
|
|
|
103 2006-01-16.txt:19:55:27: <GregorR> Nah, parsers are easier in Haskell.
|
|
|
104 2006-01-17.txt:00:48:51: <ihope> Even easier to port to Haskell... >:-)
|
|
|
105 2006-01-17.txt:00:49:05: <calamari> can haskell compile to c?
|
|
|
106 2006-01-17.txt:00:49:21: <GregorR> I think you can compile Haskell to ASM.
|
|
|
107 2006-01-17.txt:15:40:20: <ihope> Combine that with the variables of Haskell and the object-orientation of C, and you get a "great" lanugage.
|
|
|
108 2006-01-18.txt:02:41:46: <SimonRC> (patterns are analogous to Haskell patterns
|
|
|
109 2006-01-18.txt:02:45:41: <SimonRC> (anagram of Haskell, from which it steals some features, and in which it is written)
|
|
|
110 2006-01-18.txt:02:48:29: <SimonRC> the point of | is to do proper pattern-matching like Haskell has, but it assembles the terms at runtime!
|
|
|
111 2006-01-18.txt:02:57:54: <SimonRC> BTW, I have only been learning Haskell since Sep/Oct 2004, and the only interpreter experience I have had was reading McCarthy's original LISP EVAL (translated into Common LISP), and that didn't even have lexical scope, just dynamic scope!
|
|
|
112 2006-01-19.txt:00:07:31: <SimonRC> GregorR: learn Haskell.
|
|
|
113 2006-01-19.txt:00:07:48: <ihope> I lubs da Haskell.
|
|
|
114 2006-01-19.txt:00:13:02: <GregorR> I'm gonna download hentai instead of learning Haskell.
|
|
|
115 2006-01-19.txt:14:02:42: <SimonRC> any Haskell experts here?
|
|
|
116 2006-01-19.txt:14:03:17: <jix> i know a bit haskell
|
|
|
117 2006-01-19.txt:14:03:17: * SimonRC ponders joining #haskell
|
|
|
118 2006-01-19.txt:14:09:18: <jix> ask #haskell
|
|
|
119 2006-01-24.txt:01:07:37: <ihope> Haskell is looking very unfriendly to me right now.
|
|
|
120 2006-01-28.txt:13:22:40: <jix> maybe i'm going to write a rhotor => haskell translator.. that should be easier
|
|
|
121 2006-01-28.txt:13:22:56: <jix> but haskell has a different io system
|
|
|
122 2006-01-28.txt:13:29:39: <jix> is it possible to simulate that in haskell?
|
|
|
123 2006-01-28.txt:13:42:43: <fizzie> I don't really know enough about haskell to answer. Perhaps, but maybe not. Probably at least not without having the IO type everywhere.
|
|
|
124 2006-01-28.txt:14:38:06: <SimonRC> (from #haskell)
|
|
|
125 2006-01-28.txt:16:09:08: <SimonRC> either of you know much Haskell?
|
|
|
126 2006-01-28.txt:16:10:42: <SimonRC> It's just I've found this, which apppears to be a very good idea: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/CollectionClassFramework
|
|
|
127 2006-01-28.txt:17:18:22: <SimonRC> use Parsec (I assume you're using Haskell).
|
|
|
128 2006-01-28.txt:18:29:44: <ihope> Aah! It's exactly the same here as at #haskell!
|
|
|
129 2006-01-29.txt:11:30:57: <jix> but did you wrote them in.. HASKELL!
|
|
|
130 2006-01-29.txt:11:31:13: <nooga> what? u r writing it in evul haskell?
|
|
|
131 2006-01-29.txt:11:31:31: <jix> because i wrote the interpreter in haskell
|
|
|
132 2006-01-29.txt:11:31:47: <jix> i did that in about 50loc haskell
|
|
|
133 2006-01-29.txt:11:31:57: <nooga> but why haskell
|
|
|
134 2006-01-29.txt:11:32:31: <jix> and haskell isn't that bad
|
|
|
135 2006-01-29.txt:11:33:26: <nooga> isn't ruby partially inspired by haskell?
|
|
|
136 2006-01-31.txt:11:30:51: <kipple> haven't tried. don't have haskell
|
|
|
137 2006-01-31.txt:11:31:38: <jix> and crosscompiling haskell... no
|
|
|
138 2006-01-31.txt:11:31:41: <kipple> well, I guess I should download haskell.
|
|
|
139 2006-01-31.txt:11:31:52: <jix> download the glasgow haskell compiler (ghc)
|
|
|
140 2006-02-02.txt:13:31:30: <nooga> being 14 yr old and writing parsers in haskell -.-
|
|
|
141 2006-02-02.txt:13:57:05: <nooga> he's 14 and he's writing interpreters in haskell and he knows lambda calculus and everything!!!!!!
|
|
|
142 2006-02-02.txt:14:04:42: <nooga> where'd you learn haskell huh!?
|
|
|
143 2006-02-03.txt:14:48:35: <nooga> haskell seems very nice for writing interpreters
|
|
|
144 2006-02-03.txt:14:57:10: <nooga> sure, haskell is better for parsing than C+yacc as is
|
|
|
145 2006-02-03.txt:15:54:51: * nooga loves ruby & haskell
|
|
|
146 2006-02-03.txt:16:51:30: <nooga> ah, i was typing "haskell" when windiw appeared
|
|
|
147 2006-02-04.txt:14:51:38: <nooga> i woder if apache has Haskell-mod
|
|
|
148 2006-02-09.txt:00:41:17: * ihope merges Python and Haskell into an esoteric language
|
|
|
149 2006-02-15.txt:13:11:15: <SimonRC> Currying is the major area of winnage of Haskell over LISP.
|
|
|
150 2006-02-15.txt:13:21:44: <SimonRC> also Unlambda ('" syntax), LISP (cona and nil), and Haskell (pattern-matching).
|
|
|
151 2006-02-18.txt:02:45:40: <graue> I think we should loosen up the ontopicness requirements of the esowiki and allow other languages to be mentioned, such as Lisp and Haskell
|
|
|
152 2006-02-18.txt:02:53:56: <GregorR> At one point I could write fairly decent Haskell.
|
|
|
153 2006-02-21.txt:15:24:42: <nooga> haskell?
|
|
|
154 2006-02-21.txt:15:27:06: <nooga> how to parse it in haskell to get it in a format siutable for your algo? ;p
|
|
|
155 2006-02-21.txt:18:26:49: <calamari> that's okay, I know nothing about haskell
|
|
|
156 2006-02-24.txt:21:42:26: <ihope> So Haskell is better than any other language, and Python is the best.
|
|
|
157 2006-02-24.txt:21:43:38: <int-e> haskell is good at stuff that python sucks at. and vice versa. both aren't good languages for number-crunching.
|
|
|
158 2006-02-25.txt:01:15:25: <ihope> Haskell.
|
|
|
159 2006-02-25.txt:01:16:22: <ihope> Haskell has stuff like "factorial x = product [1..x]".
|
|
|
160 2006-02-25.txt:14:42:33: <ihope> jix: give me a Haskell to BF and I'll be happy
|
|
|
161 2006-02-26.txt:15:08:41: <GregorR> Idonno, does rhotor not do fflush (in Haskell form X-P)?
|
|
|
162 2006-03-01.txt:19:35:43: <ihope> Haskell.
|
|
|
163 2006-03-04.txt:06:03:07: <kipple> I guess some of the newer langs like haskell or ruby would also be fine
|
|
|
164 2006-03-04.txt:06:03:18: <jix> yeah but haskell isn't good for imperative languages....
|
|
|
165 2006-03-04.txt:13:35:23: <jix> but i never changed the default for haskell D'OH
|
|
|
166 2006-03-04.txt:13:37:43: <SimonRC> (in Haskell mode)
|
|
|
167 2006-03-04.txt:13:37:50: <SimonRC> Probably because you aren't supposed to use tabs in Haskell.
|
|
|
168 2006-03-05.txt:18:33:42: <ihope> 8-(o_O:-) is legal Haskell code.
|
|
|
169 2006-03-08.txt:21:33:01: <SimonRC> Lazy streams: In C++ they are ugly. In Scheme they are beautiful. In Haskell they are invisible.
|
|
|
170 2006-03-08.txt:21:34:53: <fuse> so should i give haskell a spin?
|
|
|
171 2006-03-08.txt:21:34:57: <ihope> "How's the memory allocation in Haskell?" "Oh, it's invisible." "What about polymorphism?" "Invisible." "Function currying?" "Invisible..."
|
|
|
172 2006-03-08.txt:21:35:04: <ihope> Yes. Haskell's very nice.
|
|
|
173 2006-03-08.txt:21:35:54: * ihope thinks he took the "oh, Haskell's not right for everybody" too far
|
|
|
174 2006-03-08.txt:21:37:55: <ihope> Is networking with Scheme any harder/easier than with Haskell?
|
|
|
175 2006-03-08.txt:21:38:25: <ihope> My current Haskell "om u nead this" is classes.
|
|
|
176 2006-03-08.txt:22:11:36: <SimonRC> that's the 10% of stuff you do with Haskell type classes that you can't do in Java
|
|
|
177 2006-03-08.txt:22:13:57: <ihope> Like Haskell's (Read [a]) => a
|
|
|
178 2006-03-08.txt:22:14:30: <fuse> ok. i don't know haskell. i've done java professionally, though. excuse me while i go shoot myself.
|
|
|
179 2006-03-08.txt:22:31:54: <fuse> ok. i should learn haskell, then.
|
|
|
180 2006-03-08.txt:22:32:09: <fuse> is there a shortcut? like haskell for idiots or something?
|
|
|
181 2006-03-08.txt:22:32:40: <fuse> is this any good? http://www.haskell.org/tutorial/
|
|
|
182 2006-03-08.txt:22:33:44: <ihope> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Haskell
|
|
|
183 2006-03-09.txt:01:10:45: <SimonRC> My technique for learning Haskell was a sort of Esme Wetherwax technique...
|
|
|
184 2006-03-09.txt:01:17:50: <SimonRC> Monads were added to Haskell for the express purpose of creating the IO monad.
|
|
|
185 2006-03-09.txt:20:00:02: <fuse> did you already program in some imperative language before learning haskell?
|
|
|
186 2006-03-09.txt:20:01:02: <ihope> Well, once you learn functional programming in general, Haskell's a piece of cake.
|
|
|
187 2006-03-10.txt:15:52:19: <jix> i did it that way in my rhotor interpreter (which would work in c++ too but it wouldn't be lazy the way i implemented it in haskell)
|
|
|
188 2006-03-10.txt:17:20:56: <ihope> So (-: )-: v_v is legal Haskell code.
|
|
|
189 2006-03-11.txt:14:53:12: <SimonRC> Likely Haskell: rot = rotY (pu/8) .*. rotX (pu/12)
|
|
|
190 2006-03-11.txt:23:06:54: <fuse> ihope: where's that haskell book you recommended again?
|
|
|
191 2006-03-11.txt:23:07:05: <ihope> I reccomended a Haskell book?
|
|
|
192 2006-03-11.txt:23:08:09: <ihope> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Haskell
|
|
|
193 2006-03-12.txt:20:31:23: <ihope_> Heh, I started something over at #haskell.
|
|
|
194 2006-03-12.txt:21:45:04: <ihope_> Three channels: #esoteric, #haskell and #meta-science.
|
|
|
195 2006-03-15.txt:15:50:38: <ihope> So should I waste time on IRC, waste time playing games, or study Haskell concurrency and stuff?
|
|
|
196 2006-03-15.txt:15:55:20: <SimonRC> ihope: haskell
|
|
|
197 2006-03-17.txt:10:00:51: <jix> i read a german haskell tutorial
|
|
|
198 2006-03-18.txt:19:00:07: * ihope realizes that EagleBot hasn't been written yet, laughs, and begins reading the Haskell API documentation
|
|
|
199 2006-03-19.txt:16:51:02: <ihope_> "Be existed a interface by Haskell that?"
|
|
|
200 2006-03-19.txt:16:54:33: <ihope_> "Is there an interface for that for Haskell?
|
|
|
201 2006-03-19.txt:16:57:58: <ski__> i don't know of any haskell interface, no
|
|
|
202 2006-03-19.txt:16:58:58: <ski__> wouldn't you need to e.g. port a haskell-runtime to the platform, then ?
|
|
|
203 2006-03-19.txt:16:59:28: <ski__> or were you thinking of a DSL in haskell that compiles down to, say, quite simple nqc ?
|
|
|
204 2006-03-19.txt:17:01:18: <SimonRC> they could accomodate the Haskell RTS
|
|
|
205 2006-03-24.txt:21:06:10: <fuse> ihope: ever read 'the haskell road to logic, maths and programming'?
|
|
|
206 2006-03-26.txt:15:06:09: <ihope> Hmm, thought I was in #haskell.
|
|
|
207 2006-03-26.txt:15:06:32: <ihope> Haskell is a programming language...
|
|
|
208 2006-03-27.txt:00:25:08: <SimonRC> I used Haskell, of course
|
|
|
209 2006-04-07.txt:03:59:50: <ihope> Hmm, Haskell's readsPrec is nice. Let's see here...
|
|
|
210 2006-04-29.txt:00:10:17: <kate`> kipple, ditto your haskell program
|
|
|
211 2006-04-29.txt:18:28:21: <nooga> haskell
|
|
|
212 2006-04-29.txt:18:28:48: <ihope_> I like Haskell.
|
|
|
213 2006-05-05.txt:23:09:32: <ihope_> Stick a "let" in front of that second line and do some twiddling between the braces to get valid Haskell code. :-)
|
|
|
214 2006-05-05.txt:23:14:20: <ihope_> > join #haskell
|
|
|
215 2006-05-06.txt:02:46:31: <lament> JOIN #HASKELL OR DIE
|
|
|
216 2006-05-06.txt:02:46:36: <lament> GET A HASKELL BRAIN IMPLANT OR DIE
|
|
|
217 2006-05-15.txt:03:09:56: <SimonRC> ( http://www.haskell.org/haskore/ )
|
|
|
218 2006-05-24.txt:16:14:36: <ihope> Is that a Haskell expression?
|
|
|
219 2006-05-24.txt:16:14:55: <ihope> Oh right, Haskell uses /=, not !=.
|
|
|
220 2006-05-24.txt:17:30:04: <jix> SimonRC: i thought of haskell and...
|
|
|
221 2006-05-24.txt:17:30:10: <jix> i don't want a cpu that works like haskell...
|
|
|
222 2006-05-26.txt:06:07:36: <Arrogant> One of these days I'm going to learn Haskell and implement something in that.
|
|
|
223 2006-05-26.txt:06:07:51: <Arrogant> I heard Haskell is good at parsing.
|
|
|
224 2006-05-26.txt:06:09:20: <Arrogant> Haskell done hurt me brain.
|
|
|
225 2006-05-30.txt:01:20:26: <ihope> Now, ~ would have the type IO TimeVar, if it were a Haskell value.
|
|
|
226 2006-05-30.txt:21:00:06: <SimonRC> (#haskell)
|
|
|
227 2006-06-01.txt:20:36:48: <SimonRC> I prefer Haskell.
|
|
|
228 2006-06-01.txt:20:37:15: <bsmntbombdood> haskell is cool
|
|
|
229 2006-06-01.txt:20:37:19: <SimonRC> I have used the same method for learning several things about Haskell:
|
|
|
230 2006-06-01.txt:20:39:46: <bsmntbombdood> i just started learning haskell
|
|
|
231 2006-06-01.txt:20:44:32: <SimonRC> see "Tying the knot" in the haskell wiki
|
|
|
232 2006-06-04.txt:01:25:24: <ihope> Haskell to Unlambda.
|
|
|
233 2006-06-04.txt:01:30:30: <ihope> Hey, it looks like D could be almost as good as Haskell!
|
|
|
234 2006-06-04.txt:01:31:09: <ihope> Of course, it's hard to compare a language like Haskell to a language like D, because they're so different.
|
|
|
235 2006-06-04.txt:01:38:04: <ihope> Haskell just plain doesn't have foo.bar.
|
|
|
236 2006-06-04.txt:01:38:21: <bsmntbombdood> there's oo dilaects of haskell
|
|
|
237 2006-06-04.txt:01:50:35: <SimonRC> you could wrtite a module in haskell to allow it to emulate OO, I suppose
|
|
|
238 2006-06-04.txt:02:04:06: <ihope> main(){} -- Pretend this is Haskell, then.
|
|
|
239 2006-06-04.txt:02:18:26: <ihope> s/C/Haskell/
|
|
|
240 2006-06-04.txt:02:18:36: <ihope> s/Haskell/Unlambda/ :-P
|
|
|
241 2006-06-05.txt:00:36:45: <SimonRC> while Haskell absolutely rocks on the complicated-datastructure-initialisation front, it sucks on the complicated-datastructure-mutation front.
|
|
|
242 2006-06-05.txt:16:31:48: <ihope> #esoteric here, #nethack here, #haskell here, #math here, #spore there, and #sporks somewhere else.
|
|
|
243 2006-06-05.txt:23:00:16: <ihope> Why not add inline assembler to Haskell, to? :-P
|
|
|
244 2006-06-05.txt:23:01:05: <ihope> Like the Haskell FFI, slightly.
|
|
|
245 2006-06-07.txt:20:43:16: <ihope_> I'd give you a Haskell expression that does that, but my arrow keys don't work, and that makes it Abosulutely Out of the Question.
|
|
|
246 2006-06-08.txt:04:44:47: <vincenz> it's a mixture of haskell and ml
|
|
|
247 2006-06-14.txt:23:29:47: <ihope> I dunno. In the Haskell program "main = seq undefined (3+2)", is the (3+2) a comment?
|
|
|
248 2006-06-17.txt:17:33:14: <ihope> BASIC and Haskell are opposites.
|
|
|
249 2006-06-24.txt:22:42:46: <SimonRC> *cough*Haskell*cough*
|
|
|
250 2006-06-24.txt:22:52:41: <SimonRC> Therefore I would attack it with Haskell.
|
|
|
251 2006-06-24.txt:22:55:08: <SimonRC> IIRC, there is a cross-compiler to the JVM for Haskell anyway
|
|
|
252 2006-06-24.txt:22:55:32: <_W_> yes, but is it simpler to *output* haskell than jva bytecode?
|
|
|
253 2006-06-24.txt:22:58:07: <SimonRC> I could write a Haskell library to do that, though it would take me ages to make it as good as I hope BCEL is.
|
|
|
254 2006-06-25.txt:02:24:59: <ihope> main = forkIO main >> forkIO main -- a Haskell forkbomb
|
|
|
255 2006-06-25.txt:02:25:10: <ihope> main = forkIO main >> main -- another Haskell forkbomb
|
|
|
256 2006-07-01.txt:22:52:22: <SimonRC> It's just Haskell written like Sadol with the datatypes of Lisp.
|
|
|
257 2006-07-20.txt:22:36:30: <ihope> I see what whoever said when he/she said that typeless Haskell would be a nightmare to debug.
|
|
|
258 2006-07-20.txt:22:39:21: <jix> typeless haskell?
|
|
|
259 2006-07-20.txt:22:39:52: <ihope> Well... Haskell with all the type stuff done at runtime.
|
|
|
260 2006-07-20.txt:22:46:35: <ihope> Haskell, with types :-)
|
|
|
261 2006-07-25.txt:04:42:14: <ihope> Unlambda is easy. Just write Haskell, turn it into combinators, replace "fix" with some esoteric thingy, perform abstraction elimination, and string it all together!
|
|
|
262 2006-07-25.txt:16:17:43: <ihope_> Haskell = (|really stupid> + |really great>)/sqrt 2
|
|
|
263 2006-07-25.txt:16:18:27: <ihope_> I've never seen any C++ networking stuff, but in Haskell it's just a matter of some thingy. Lemme see here...
|
|
|
264 2006-07-25.txt:19:52:47: <lament> (or, i suppose, writing the whole thing in Haskell? But somehow i doubt that would really be an efficient solution)
|
|
|
265 2006-07-25.txt:19:53:10: <ihope> I dunno if Haskell would help.
|
|
|
266 2006-07-27.txt:17:40:36: <ihope> Quantum Haskell.
|
|
|
267 2006-07-27.txt:19:07:27: <Razor-X> Quantum Haskell?!
|
|
|
268 2006-07-27.txt:19:17:32: <lament> i'm pretty sure there's already something very much like quantum haskell.
|
|
|
269 2006-07-27.txt:19:31:25: <Razor-X> You have to understand that to code in Haskell too.
|
|
|
270 2006-07-27.txt:21:14:11: <ihope> Well, the Haskell form of that is "f x = if x < 0 then 3 else 4", and that's pretty much how it works in lambda calculus.
|
|
|
271 2006-07-27.txt:21:14:59: <Razor-X> I know Haskell (I've written some nifty big things, like an IRC bot), but it *is* a programming language after all.
|
|
|
272 2006-07-28.txt:01:20:05: <Razor-X> (Note: I said the same thing about my Podcast client in Haskell.)
|
|
|
273 2006-07-28.txt:17:01:04: <Razor-X> Like you can in Haskell.
|
|
|
274 2006-07-28.txt:17:02:45: <ihope_> Like Haskell's do {this; that <- these; return those}?
|
|
|
275 2006-07-28.txt:17:04:55: <Razor-X> Haskell indentation does get annoying, especially with let.
|
|
|
276 2006-08-02.txt:22:14:57: <ihope_> Is Haskell considered sane?
|
|
|
277 2006-08-10.txt:01:44:31: <ihope> Haskell uses mathematical functions, but pretty much everything else uses imperative ones.
|
|
|
278 2006-08-10.txt:01:53:37: <ihope> I think my dad taught me Pascal, then I tried to learn C, then he tried to teach me Java, then I learned Haskell, then I looked at Python.
|
|
|
279 2006-08-10.txt:01:55:06: <ihope> Then I took a look at Lisp, and somehow landed with Haskell.
|
|
|
280 2006-08-10.txt:03:44:26: <Razor-X> I like Haskell and Ruby.
|
|
|
281 2006-08-11.txt:01:25:40: <Razor-X> In Haskell the problem I had with my IRC bot was that it was logistically impossible to move the pointer to the end of the read-buffer. I found a (somewhat memory expensive) workaround to that, but I never buffered writes.
|
|
|
282 2006-08-11.txt:02:42:00: <Razor-X> Haskell is lazy.
|
|
|
283 2006-08-11.txt:02:42:57: <Razor-X> But Haskell says on its website it is a lazy programming language.
|
|
|
284 2006-08-11.txt:02:45:00: <Razor-X> Python and Haskell use indentation which gets annoying.
|
|
|
285 2006-08-11.txt:04:58:31: <Razor-X> Along with Haskell and all the little Esolangs.
|
|
|
286 2006-08-16.txt:01:02:36: <oerjanj> which makes me wonder what you think about haskell :-)
|
|
|
287 2006-08-16.txt:01:07:23: <oerjanj> i suppose if you don't like to find symbols you don't like haskell syntax either
|
|
|
288 2006-08-16.txt:01:59:26: <oerjanj> even in haskell, the top level of a program is essentially imperative
|
|
|
289 2006-08-16.txt:02:24:25: * oerjanj made his Haskell version work
|
|
|
290 2006-08-16.txt:02:28:50: <oerjanj> a Haskell one-liner
|
|
|
291 2006-08-21.txt:01:22:25: <ihope> Haskell is more fun.
|
|
|
292 2006-08-22.txt:00:29:39: <Razor-X> If you want to write Haskell in Unlambda and then write your program in Haskell, be my guest.
|
|
|
293 2006-08-22.txt:03:30:36: <Razor-X> I know a whole bunch. C, Haskell, and Ruby are my strongest.
|
|
|
294 2006-08-22.txt:03:31:17: <Razor-X> Go functional with Lisp and Haskell. That's *really* hard. Ruby is really really simple.
|
|
|
295 2006-08-22.txt:03:33:57: <Razor-X> Only Haskell is pure.
|
|
|
296 2006-08-22.txt:03:43:54: <Razor-X> Haskell is more, IMO.
|
|
|
297 2006-08-22.txt:03:46:08: <Razor-X> putStrLn "Haskell is lots of fun"
|
|
|
298 2006-08-22.txt:03:53:55: <Razor-X> Haskell is Lazy!
|
|
|
299 2006-08-22.txt:22:25:11: <ihope> I think that'd allow a person to treat anything as a list in Haskell.
|
|
|
300 2006-08-22.txt:22:42:00: <ihope> Haskell uses x:y for a cons.
|
|
|
301 [too many lines; stopping]
|
