2024/04/24

Newest at the top

2024-04-24 17:12:07 +0200tromp(~textual@92-110-219-57.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl) (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
2024-04-24 17:10:15 +0200zwrvhides
2024-04-24 17:10:06 +0200 <danse-nr3> well...
2024-04-24 17:09:53 +0200 <zwrv> the Report is not proper Haskell
2024-04-24 17:09:32 +0200p3n(~p3n@2a00:19a0:3:7c:0:d9c6:7cf6:1)
2024-04-24 17:09:22 +0200 <EvanR> it's in the Report
2024-04-24 17:09:05 +0200 <zwrv> undefined is not proper Haskell
2024-04-24 17:07:20 +0200euleritian(~euleritia@dynamic-176-000-165-138.176.0.pool.telefonica.de)
2024-04-24 17:06:52 +0200euleritian(~euleritia@ip4d16fc38.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de) (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
2024-04-24 17:05:26 +0200Guest13(~Guest13@cpc93370-hers8-2-0-cust590.6-3.cable.virginm.net)
2024-04-24 16:59:55 +0200tri(~tri@ool-18bbef1a.static.optonline.net) (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2024-04-24 16:59:10 +0200average(uid473595@user/average)
2024-04-24 16:58:39 +0200shapr(~user@c-24-218-186-89.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2024-04-24 16:55:37 +0200tri(~tri@ool-18bbef1a.static.optonline.net)
2024-04-24 16:50:36 +0200waleee(~waleee@h-176-10-144-38.NA.cust.bahnhof.se) (Client Quit)
2024-04-24 16:49:05 +0200waleee(~waleee@h-176-10-144-38.NA.cust.bahnhof.se)
2024-04-24 16:47:16 +0200euleritian(~euleritia@ip4d16fc38.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de)
2024-04-24 16:46:48 +0200euleritian(~euleritia@dynamic-176-000-165-138.176.0.pool.telefonica.de) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2024-04-24 16:41:02 +0200Raito_Bezarius(~Raito@wireguard/tunneler/raito-bezarius)
2024-04-24 16:31:39 +0200cods(~fred@tuxee.net) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
2024-04-24 16:30:56 +0200 <EvanR> never a good sign
2024-04-24 16:30:30 +0200 <EvanR> contradiction
2024-04-24 16:30:26 +0200 <EvanR> Void is a type with no values. Yet we found one anyway xD
2024-04-24 16:27:44 +0200 <danse-nr3> :/
2024-04-24 16:27:21 +0200 <danse-nr3> oh i see, void is supposed to be void ...
2024-04-24 16:26:59 +0200 <danse-nr3> i don't get your example ncf. undefined is any type, therefore also Void
2024-04-24 16:25:32 +0200 <EvanR> type system is already inconsistent, but I vaguely recall additional separate reasoning about it
2024-04-24 16:23:51 +0200 <ncf> looks pretty inconsistent to me already
2024-04-24 16:23:45 +0200 <lambdabot> Void
2024-04-24 16:23:44 +0200 <ncf> :t undefined :: Void
2024-04-24 16:23:37 +0200 <lambdabot> a
2024-04-24 16:23:36 +0200 <ncf> :t undefined
2024-04-24 16:22:58 +0200 <zwrv> dependent haskell makes the type system inconsistent?
2024-04-24 16:22:14 +0200zwrv(~yin@user/zero)
2024-04-24 16:20:36 +0200zwrv(~yin@user/zero) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
2024-04-24 16:17:38 +0200gmg(~user@user/gehmehgeh)
2024-04-24 16:17:19 +0200gmg(~user@user/gehmehgeh) (Remote host closed the connection)
2024-04-24 16:13:52 +0200notzmv(~daniel@user/notzmv)
2024-04-24 16:10:50 +0200 <EvanR> which is what dependent haskell does
2024-04-24 16:10:45 +0200xff0x(~xff0x@2405:6580:b080:900:a709:5227:95bf:dd51)
2024-04-24 16:10:30 +0200 <EvanR> you can also ignore the issue and do Type : Type, if stuff like girard's paradox doesn't bother you
2024-04-24 16:09:39 +0200 <haskellbridge> <i​rregularsphere> s/yes/sure
2024-04-24 16:09:30 +0200 <haskellbridge> <i​rregularsphere> EvanR: yes, but I guess it's better to live off an already infinite tower
2024-04-24 16:09:02 +0200raehik(~raehik@rdng-25-b2-v4wan-169990-cust1344.vm39.cable.virginm.net)
2024-04-24 16:06:43 +0200 <EvanR> a dependently typed system doesn't necessarily need an infinite hierarchy of Type, it could provide like 5 levels and say screw you if you end up needing more. Similar to GHC's tuple sizes
2024-04-24 16:03:21 +0200 <zwrv> __monty__: i know i know
2024-04-24 16:02:37 +0200 <__monty__> zwrv: I wouldn't take anyone's word for it for one thing.
2024-04-24 16:02:03 +0200hueso(~root@user/hueso)
2024-04-24 16:02:02 +0200 <ph88> is haskell on the way to be dependently typed ?
2024-04-24 15:59:37 +0200 <zwrv> if i write a medium sized project in both simple, idiomatic haskell and simple, idiomatic chez scheme, which one would you bet to perform the best speedwise?