Newest at the top
| 2024-11-19 13:19:06 +0100 | <kuribas> | For example anonymous records. |
| 2024-11-19 13:19:04 +0100 | lortabac | (~lortabac@2a01:e0a:541:b8f0:55ab:e185:7f81:54a4) lortabac |
| 2024-11-19 13:18:44 +0100 | Digit | (~user@user/digit) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2024-11-19 13:18:42 +0100 | <kuribas> | Well, if duck typing is structural typing, then idris doesn't have it, but it's possible to emulate it with dependent types. |
| 2024-11-19 13:18:26 +0100 | stiell_ | (~stiell@gateway/tor-sasl/stiell) stiell |
| 2024-11-19 13:17:25 +0100 | <dminuoso> | Id say not really. |
| 2024-11-19 13:16:15 +0100 | <kuribas> | Isn't duck typing the equivalent of type classes? |
| 2024-11-19 13:15:48 +0100 | <dminuoso> | If it type checks like a duck, we shall make it a duck. |
| 2024-11-19 13:15:34 +0100 | euleritian | (~euleritia@ip4d16fc9f.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de) |
| 2024-11-19 13:15:28 +0100 | <dminuoso> | Sounds like the type system way of duck typing. :-) |
| 2024-11-19 13:15:16 +0100 | euleritian | (~euleritia@dynamic-176-001-000-183.176.1.pool.telefonica.de) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2024-11-19 13:15:06 +0100 | sord937 | (~sord937@gateway/tor-sasl/sord937) sord937 |
| 2024-11-19 13:14:59 +0100 | <kuribas> | Literally. They merged the auto implicit feature and type classes. |
| 2024-11-19 13:14:46 +0100 | sord937 | (~sord937@gateway/tor-sasl/sord937) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-11-19 13:14:30 +0100 | <kuribas> | instance resolution corresponds to proof search. |
| 2024-11-19 13:14:20 +0100 | <kuribas> | Leary: no, that's just type checking, implicit resolution and proof search are different features. |
| 2024-11-19 13:12:56 +0100 | <Leary> | Sounds evil. Isn't that just IncoherentInstances? |
| 2024-11-19 13:11:57 +0100 | <kuribas> | geekosaur: rebindable syntax will use the (>>=) in scope, but in idris it will try every definition of (>>=), and pick the one that typechecks.. |
| 2024-11-19 13:10:52 +0100 | <kuribas> | geekosaur: It's not the same. In haskell you must have a non ambiguous way to resolve (>>=), but in idris it's overloaded, it will do a search. |
| 2024-11-19 13:09:03 +0100 | ubert | (~Thunderbi@178.115.41.15.wireless.dyn.drei.com) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2024-11-19 13:08:08 +0100 | chiselfuse | (~chiselfus@user/chiselfuse) chiselfuse |
| 2024-11-19 13:07:46 +0100 | mari-estel | (~mari-este@user/mari-estel) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-11-19 13:07:40 +0100 | sord937 | (~sord937@gateway/tor-sasl/sord937) sord937 |
| 2024-11-19 13:05:58 +0100 | <hellwolf> | "The sum of a collection of actions using (<|>), generalizing concat." |
| 2024-11-19 13:05:41 +0100 | stiell_ | (~stiell@gateway/tor-sasl/stiell) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2024-11-19 13:05:41 +0100 | sord937 | (~sord937@gateway/tor-sasl/sord937) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2024-11-19 13:05:40 +0100 | <hellwolf> | I can't wrap my head around intuitively wrt asum. fmap Just. I can see the type matches. |
| 2024-11-19 13:03:31 +0100 | chiselfuse | (~chiselfus@user/chiselfuse) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-11-19 13:03:22 +0100 | sroso | (~sroso@user/SrOso) (Quit: Leaving :)) |
| 2024-11-19 13:02:01 +0100 | caconym | (~caconym@user/caconym) caconym |
| 2024-11-19 13:01:33 +0100 | <dminuoso> | (Or maybe its defined in some module in your project) |
| 2024-11-19 13:01:09 +0100 | <dminuoso> | As you can see, it's from other packages. I think hoogle always lists `base` references first. |
| 2024-11-19 13:00:23 +0100 | <dminuoso> | hellwolf: You can use hoogle https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=nothing to discover likely origins of identifiers. |
| 2024-11-19 13:00:09 +0100 | caconym | (~caconym@user/caconym) (Quit: bye) |
| 2024-11-19 13:00:04 +0100 | son0p | (~ff@2800:e2:f80:ee7::4) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2024-11-19 12:59:54 +0100 | <hellwolf> | same for nothing <-- where is it even from? I used Const nothing |
| 2024-11-19 12:59:33 +0100 | <hellwolf> | yes, that's interest. but I had to import Data.Applicative |
| 2024-11-19 12:57:47 +0100 | <dminuoso> | No worries. Leary's answer is more clever, though if you are curious. |
| 2024-11-19 12:56:43 +0100 | <hellwolf> | but "either" is good. here shows my lack of production experience of Haskell, in general. I only plays around :) |
| 2024-11-19 12:56:10 +0100 | <hellwolf> | yea, got it, it would stay Either |
| 2024-11-19 12:55:14 +0100 | <dminuoso> | Note that it's the same `m` here in both arguments and the resultg? |
| 2024-11-19 12:55:03 +0100 | <lambdabot> | Monad m => m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b |
| 2024-11-19 12:55:02 +0100 | <dminuoso> | :t (>>=) |
| 2024-11-19 12:54:59 +0100 | <dminuoso> | hellwolf: Here's a quick hint |
| 2024-11-19 12:54:48 +0100 | <hellwolf> | bad gpt |
| 2024-11-19 12:54:46 +0100 | <hellwolf> | sorry |
| 2024-11-19 12:54:45 +0100 | <hellwolf> | no, it doesn't compile |
| 2024-11-19 12:54:35 +0100 | <hellwolf> | it compiles. actually it's correct. since Either is a monad |
| 2024-11-19 12:54:13 +0100 | <dminuoso> | That looks wrong |
| 2024-11-19 12:53:53 +0100 | <hellwolf> | This: S.decode bs >>= Just . ADDR |