Newest at the top
| 2024-06-30 20:03:25 +0200 | <mreh> | I'm hoping I can actually tackle the stuff I want to do with types |
| 2024-06-30 20:03:23 +0200 | <nhar> | Rembane: thnkx! I'm new to IRC and have no clue what I'm doing xD |
| 2024-06-30 20:03:06 +0200 | <mreh> | nhar: has it been helpful? |
| 2024-06-30 20:03:05 +0200 | <Rembane> | :D |
| 2024-06-30 20:03:02 +0200 | <lambdabot> | not an expression: ‘-- Markdown block quotes doesn't really work here. :)’ |
| 2024-06-30 20:03:02 +0200 | <lambdabot> | <no location info>: error: |
| 2024-06-30 20:03:01 +0200 | <Rembane> | > -- Markdown block quotes doesn't really work here. :) |
| 2024-06-30 20:02:54 +0200 | <nhar> | And I thought it was a great read! Super duper helpful |
| 2024-06-30 20:02:52 +0200 | <mreh> | OpenGL Shading Language |
| 2024-06-30 20:02:33 +0200 | <nhar> | what is GLSL? |
| 2024-06-30 20:02:23 +0200 | <nhar> | I'm not sure that that is... |
| 2024-06-30 20:02:17 +0200 | <lambdabot> | parse error (possibly incorrect indentation or mismatched brackets) |
| 2024-06-30 20:02:17 +0200 | <lambdabot> | <hint>:1:23: error: |
| 2024-06-30 20:02:15 +0200 | <nhar> | > I'm generating GLSL... |
| 2024-06-30 20:01:21 +0200 | <mreh> | Thinking With Types is a pretty nice book. |
| 2024-06-30 20:00:54 +0200 | <mreh> | nhar: I'm working on that |
| 2024-06-30 20:00:43 +0200 | <mreh> | I'm generating GLSL and want to see if I can statically check all the vertex buffers and uniforms are there when it comes to run it |
| 2024-06-30 20:00:36 +0200 | <nhar> | mreh: np! Not sure how user friendly it is - but if all else fails you could implement your own if your type-level-fu is up to it |
| 2024-06-30 20:00:07 +0200 | soverysour | (~soverysou@user/soverysour) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2024-06-30 19:59:49 +0200 | <mreh> | nhar: thx |
| 2024-06-30 19:59:45 +0200 | <mreh> | google is your friend |
| 2024-06-30 19:58:57 +0200 | dcoutts | (~duncan@ip-185-104-136-57.ptr.icomera.net) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 2024-06-30 19:58:53 +0200 | <nhar> | mreh: i found this: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/type-level-sets-0.7 |
| 2024-06-30 19:57:36 +0200 | <mreh> | Is there an equivalent to a Map at the type level? |
| 2024-06-30 19:53:51 +0200 | <Lawrence1erkheim> | I think I get currying now* |
| 2024-06-30 19:53:51 +0200 | tromp | (~textual@92-110-219-57.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl) |
| 2024-06-30 19:53:46 +0200 | <Lawrence1erkheim> | Wait no, let me fix that |
| 2024-06-30 19:53:41 +0200 | <Lawrence1erkheim> | I get currying now |
| 2024-06-30 19:53:33 +0200 | <Lawrence1erkheim> | Oh my lord computerphile are so goated |
| 2024-06-30 19:53:16 +0200 | <monochrom> | A while ago I also thought about how to make >>= more theoretically pleasing. I haven't finished, but I think the first step is to flip the argument order, (a -> m b) -> (m a -> m b). Then it is just the unsurprising functor from the Kleisli category back to the original category. |
| 2024-06-30 19:48:10 +0200 | <lambdabot> | (a -> b) -> a -> b |
| 2024-06-30 19:48:09 +0200 | <probie> | :t ($) |
| 2024-06-30 19:48:07 +0200 | <lambdabot> | Monad m => (a -> m b) -> m a -> m b |
| 2024-06-30 19:48:06 +0200 | <probie> | :t (=<<) |
| 2024-06-30 19:48:02 +0200 | <lambdabot> | a -> (a -> b) -> b |
| 2024-06-30 19:48:01 +0200 | <probie> | :t (&) |
| 2024-06-30 19:48:00 +0200 | <lambdabot> | Monad m => m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b |
| 2024-06-30 19:47:58 +0200 | <probie> | :t (>>=) |
| 2024-06-30 19:47:44 +0200 | <probie> | I'd say it's closer to `(.)`/`(&)` |
| 2024-06-30 19:47:35 +0200 | <lambdabot> | Functor f => f a -> (a -> b) -> f b |
| 2024-06-30 19:47:33 +0200 | <mreh> | :t (<&>) |
| 2024-06-30 19:47:17 +0200 | <Rembane> | It's sadly quite hard to mix (<&>) and (>=>) |
| 2024-06-30 19:46:55 +0200 | <geekosaur> | ) |
| 2024-06-30 19:46:52 +0200 | <geekosaur> | (the former being (>>=) |
| 2024-06-30 19:46:43 +0200 | <geekosaur> | right, but you more often use pure computations in monadic contexts than you compose monadic operations |
| 2024-06-30 19:46:40 +0200 | <Rembane> | ncf: Yes! Just add monads! |
| 2024-06-30 19:46:26 +0200 | <ncf> | the (>=>)/(>>=) debate should be entirely analogous to the (.)/($) debate |
| 2024-06-30 19:46:17 +0200 | <Rembane> | Monad composition |
| 2024-06-30 19:46:14 +0200 | <Rembane> | Nah, it's composition |
| 2024-06-30 19:46:12 +0200 | <probie> | I use `(>>=)` a lot more than `(>=>)`. `(>=>)` is nice for stating the laws because it's pretty much composition, but using it is about as ergonomic as writing all functions point-free |