[Timber] Welcome to the timber list
andy at galois.com
Thu Dec 14 21:58:05 EST 2006
> I'm also in favor of shifting to some more "traditional", or at
> least more memory-efficient representation of strings. But the
> main question as I see it is what kind of programming pattern an
> array-based representation would support. We can't simply reuse
> list recursion, and we don' want to force all string computations
> up to the imperative level.
> Would it be possible to play with overloading here? Or to
> generalize the list comprehensions?
> I don't care too much whether we depart from Haskell or not, since
> Haskell's string handling probably isn't its strongest point. But
> I don't know of any better alternative that is both convenient and
> purely functional.
> Regarding type classes we should not feel any constraints at all.
> Simplification sounds like a good thing!
Thanks for the heads up. I hate the numeric overloading classes; it
was by far the darkest corner of the snowball compiler.
I've got the compiler compiling again; a number of undefined were
used, but you can see the patches.
- moving the *hs files into $ROOT/src
- creating a simple test directory
- Starting testing the parser, and working my way down the compiler
towards small examples working.
More information about the Timber