Newest at the top
| 2024-11-07 01:33:10 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <zwro> would we be better off without undefined and error and other bottoms? could we guarantee totality (modulo termination)? |
| 2024-11-07 01:31:11 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-11-07 01:28:54 +0100 | TonyStone | (~TonyStone@user/TonyStone) TonyStone |
| 2024-11-07 01:28:38 +0100 | TonyStone | (~TonyStone@user/TonyStone) (Quit: Leaving) |
| 2024-11-07 01:27:25 +0100 | <monochrom> | But I disagree with Oleg in thinking of () as world state. Instead, it is more honest without sacrificing pragmatics to adopt that in "() -> Codomain" the -> is a Kleisli arrow. |
| 2024-11-07 01:23:04 +0100 | <monochrom> | Haha so there is opportunity for saying "Lean 88"?! :) |
| 2024-11-07 01:22:12 +0100 | xff0x | (~xff0x@2405:6580:b080:900:3e16:56e8:fa8f:748e) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) |
| 2024-11-07 01:20:23 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) |
| 2024-11-07 01:15:47 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-11-07 01:15:32 +0100 | sprotte24 | (~sprotte24@p200300d16f45f60044d2f8c33ad18940.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Quit: Leaving) |
| 2024-11-07 01:14:57 +0100 | supercode | (~supercode@user/supercode) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2024-11-07 01:14:10 +0100 | ljdarj1 | ljdarj |
| 2024-11-07 01:14:10 +0100 | ljdarj | (~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2024-11-07 01:12:02 +0100 | ljdarj1 | (~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) ljdarj |
| 2024-11-07 01:06:18 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@syn-047-229-123-186.res.spectrum.com) peterbecich |
| 2024-11-07 01:05:05 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 2024-11-07 01:04:51 +0100 | hueso | (~root@user/hueso) hueso |
| 2024-11-07 01:00:26 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-11-07 00:58:14 +0100 | Versality | (~Versality@user/Versality) Versality |
| 2024-11-07 00:58:14 +0100 | Versality | (~Versality@84.237.180.62) (Changing host) |
| 2024-11-07 00:58:14 +0100 | Versality | (~Versality@84.237.180.62) |
| 2024-11-07 00:58:00 +0100 | Versality | (~Versality@user/Versality) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-11-07 00:57:37 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@syn-047-229-123-186.res.spectrum.com) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 2024-11-07 00:51:33 +0100 | hueso | (~root@user/hueso) (Quit: hueso) |
| 2024-11-07 00:47:06 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) |
| 2024-11-07 00:44:17 +0100 | <sshine> | well, it ain't 0x20 or 0x30, but it's a pretty number. :) |
| 2024-11-07 00:42:24 +0100 | acidjnk | (~acidjnk@p200300d6e7283f63c008ff7276864804.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds) |
| 2024-11-07 00:42:23 +0100 | <sshine> | apparently I'm not as ancient as the IO monad after all |
| 2024-11-07 00:42:12 +0100 | <sshine> | https://okmij.org/ftp/Computation/IO-monad-history.html |
| 2024-11-07 00:42:07 +0100 | <int-e> | sshine: so how do you feel about turning ancient next year *runs* |
| 2024-11-07 00:41:44 +0100 | <dolio> | I mean, that would make somse sense, because Haskell was essentially Miranda with a few tweaks. |
| 2024-11-07 00:41:13 +0100 | <sshine> | I was born that year! |
| 2024-11-07 00:41:00 +0100 | <dolio> | In '85, though? |
| 2024-11-07 00:40:56 +0100 | <sshine> | Inst, I understand that IO came to Haskell at some later point. |
| 2024-11-07 00:40:33 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> Miranda has a sys_message ADT, main uses a list of that |
| 2024-11-07 00:39:52 +0100 | kstatz12 | (~karl@user/kstatz12) (Client Quit) |
| 2024-11-07 00:39:31 +0100 | <dolio> | I'm curious what Miranda did, but I can't find my copy of the manual. |
| 2024-11-07 00:38:54 +0100 | SlackCoder | (~SlackCode@64-94-63-8.ip.weststar.net.ky) (Quit: Leaving) |
| 2024-11-07 00:38:42 +0100 | <int-e> | Anyway, the lesson here is that languages evolve, so dates of conception can be misleading. |
| 2024-11-07 00:38:14 +0100 | int-e | shrugs |
| 2024-11-07 00:38:12 +0100 | <int-e> | 1992 CLEAN still had rules, 1994 CLEAN started to look more like Haskell. |
| 2024-11-07 00:38:09 +0100 | kstatz12 | (~karl@user/kstatz12) kstatz12 |
| 2024-11-07 00:35:12 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-11-07 00:31:51 +0100 | <Inst> | so then you can argue that Haskell had the first effect system |
| 2024-11-07 00:31:22 +0100 | <Inst> | I think you can consider IO in Haskell a very primitive / early effect system, but I don't think you can say the same for Clean's uniqueness types, which seem to be a more of linearity |
| 2024-11-07 00:30:40 +0100 | pavonia | (~user@user/siracusa) siracusa |
| 2024-11-07 00:28:36 +0100 | visilii | (~visilii@85.172.77.90) |
| 2024-11-07 00:27:43 +0100 | visilii | (~visilii@85.172.77.90) (Client Quit) |
| 2024-11-07 00:27:38 +0100 | <probie> | I think `UNQ` in early Clean appears slightly before monadic IO in early Haskell, since the first monadic IO paper that's been found so far references the Clean one. |
| 2024-11-07 00:27:18 +0100 | Everything | (~Everythin@178-133-140-206.mobile.vf-ua.net) (Remote host closed the connection) |