<     May 2017     >
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa  
    1  2  3  4  5  6  
 7  8  9 10 11 12 13  
14 15 16 17 18 19 20  
21 22 23 24 _2_5 26 27  
28 29 30 31
00:05 Guanin joined
00:07 uglyfigurine joined
00:08 Pupnik joined
00:12 chlong joined
00:13 dibblego joined
00:13 dibblego joined
00:13 efm joined
00:18 aarvar joined
00:28 uglyfigurine joined
00:32 juanpaucar joined
00:34 Rodya_ joined
00:49 justinfokes joined
00:55 juanpaucar joined
01:11 justinfokes joined
01:13 NoCreativity joined
01:18 justinfokes joined
01:18 hexagoxel joined
01:22 juanpaucar joined
01:23 Big_G joined
01:27 Pupnik_ joined
01:29 justinfokes joined
01:40 justinfokes joined
01:47 justinfokes joined
01:51 malaclyps joined
01:56 peterbecich joined
02:05 kadoban joined
02:06 louispan joined
02:14 Hithroc joined
02:15 exferenceBot joined
02:19 louispan joined
02:26 juanpaucar joined
02:28 exferenceBot joined
02:33 hexagoxel joined
02:34 madknight joined
02:48 Pupnik joined
02:48 exferenceBot joined
02:56 Pupnik_ joined
03:00 wei2912 joined
03:01 efm joined
03:05 erisco joined
03:14 Rodya_ joined
03:21 aarvar joined
03:30 cschneid_ joined
03:30 juanpaucar joined
03:30 zero_byte joined
03:32 takle joined
03:36 elito25 joined
03:37 <elito25> hello
03:37 <glguy> hi
03:38 <elito25> I just began working through Haskell Programming from First Principles and have a question regarding beta reduction
03:39 <elito25> πœ†π‘₯𝑦.π‘₯𝑦 gets explained as πœ†π‘₯.(πœ†π‘¦.π‘₯𝑦) which makes total sense
03:39 <elito25> However, it gets described as (πœ†π‘₯(πœ†π‘¦).π‘₯𝑦)
03:40 <elito25> I don't understand how that works
03:40 hiratara joined
03:41 <elito25> The first implies that theyre nested functions while the second implies that theyre working on the same data
03:44 <glguy> No, (πœ†π‘₯(πœ†π‘¦).π‘₯𝑦) is incorrect
03:46 <glguy> Lambda expressions have this form: Ξ» X . Y , where X can be one (or more as a shortcut) variables, and Y is an expression
03:48 <elito25> That's why I was confused. Another question: in what order do lambda expressions reduce? Left to right or right to left?
03:49 <glguy> function application is "left-associative", so if you see: f x y, that is the same as (f x) y
03:50 <elito25> Thanks
03:54 <tmciver> Hey folks. This paste: http://lpaste.net/355467 shows my xmonad.hs before and after a small change. My question is: why did this cause my mod key binding to change? (it was bound to the windows key initially and now its back to the default Alt key).
03:54 <tmciver> I expect that `modMask` would not be overwritten.
03:55 <tmciver> Doh, wrong channel.
03:58 argent0 joined
03:58 takle joined
04:03 NeverDie joined
04:10 takle joined
04:16 Rodya_ joined
04:24 takle joined
04:34 juanpaucar joined
04:34 eacameron joined
04:35 cschneid_ joined
04:37 Big_G joined
04:39 justinfokes joined
04:46 ekasc joined
04:52 takle joined
05:04 takle joined
05:11 takle joined
05:12 justanumber joined
05:16 Rodya_ joined
05:32 takle joined
05:39 juanpaucar joined
05:40 justinfokes joined
05:50 Pupnik joined
05:50 Pupnik- joined
05:51 takle joined
06:09 ebw joined
06:09 takle joined
06:17 Rodya_ joined
06:18 takle joined
06:20 conal joined
06:22 kritzcreek joined
06:37 takle joined
06:40 eacameron joined
06:44 justinfokes joined
06:47 takle joined
06:51 paulsamways joined
07:07 fotonzade joined
07:08 takle joined
07:12 juanpaucar joined
07:13 ski joined
07:18 Rodya_ joined
07:26 delexi joined
07:31 conal joined
07:33 takle joined
07:40 justinfokes joined
07:43 g0d355__ joined
07:47 nickolay_ joined
07:49 takle joined
08:04 conal joined
08:05 takle joined
08:12 takle joined
08:15 cschneid_ joined
08:16 juanpaucar joined
08:19 Rodya_ joined
08:23 justinfokes joined
08:30 takle joined
08:36 salios joined
08:39 uglyfigurine joined
08:48 takle joined
08:57 merijn joined
09:00 justinfokes joined
09:04 im0nde joined
09:07 fotonzade joined
09:08 takle joined
09:11 conal joined
09:14 sza joined
09:18 justinfokes joined
09:19 Rodya_ joined
09:20 juanpaucar joined
09:23 foton joined
09:25 takle joined
09:35 hariel joined
09:42 takle joined
09:46 delexi joined
09:53 takle joined
09:54 justinfokes joined
09:58 thc202 joined
09:58 qu1j0t3 joined
10:00 takle joined
10:03 conal joined
10:04 yellowj joined
10:04 Gurkenglas joined
10:09 takle joined
10:12 fotonzade joined
10:12 justinfokes joined
10:20 Rodya_ joined
10:27 Kuros` joined
10:32 justinfokes joined
10:33 juanpaucar joined
10:34 pranitbauva1997 joined
10:36 simendsjo joined
10:47 yellowj joined
10:55 jorris joined
11:08 justinfokes joined
11:16 alhariel joined
11:17 contiver joined
11:17 mengu joined
11:20 Levex joined
11:21 Rodya_ joined
11:26 justinfokes joined
11:42 juanpaucar joined
11:45 Levex joined
11:51 acarrico joined
12:03 justinfokes joined
12:07 Prutheus joined
12:17 NoCreativity joined
12:18 netheranthem joined
12:21 pilne joined
12:21 justinfokes joined
12:22 Rodya_ joined
12:32 NoCreativity joined
12:35 Big_G joined
12:35 takle joined
12:36 takle joined
12:39 justinfokes joined
12:41 lambdabot joined
12:42 takle joined
12:46 juanpaucar joined
12:57 cschneid_ joined
12:57 chlong joined
12:59 malaclyps joined
13:01 Levex joined
13:10 tusj joined
13:16 justinfokes joined
13:16 mengu joined
13:17 truelean joined
13:22 Rodya_ joined
13:32 Prutheus joined
13:34 justinfokes joined
13:34 acarrico joined
13:38 yellowj joined
13:39 levex_ joined
13:40 yellowj joined
13:40 eacameron joined
13:42 justanumber joined
13:48 jsoo joined
13:50 juanpaucar joined
13:52 yellowj joined
13:52 justinfokes joined
14:10 justinfokes joined
14:23 Rodya_ joined
14:28 pranitbauva1997 joined
14:28 justinfokes joined
14:39 carlomagno joined
14:39 jsoo joined
14:45 acarrico joined
14:47 ebw joined
14:48 malaclyps joined
14:53 mengu joined
14:54 juanpaucar joined
15:06 ekasc joined
15:09 acarrico joined
15:14 justinfokes joined
15:16 peterbecich joined
15:19 Gurkenglas joined
15:25 meandi joined
15:31 fotonzade joined
15:50 justinfokes joined
15:51 wildlander joined
15:59 juanpaucar joined
16:01 eacameron joined
16:03 Guanin left
16:08 justinfokes joined
16:10 viralstitch left
16:12 ski joined
16:15 Axman6 joined
16:19 elito25 joined
16:20 <elito25> Just to clarify, let x = 10 in x + 1000 is roughly equivalent to int func (int x = 10) { return x + 1000; }
16:20 <elito25> right?
16:22 <monochrom> No.
16:22 <monochrom> But I guess "roughly" is subjective.
16:23 <elito25> How would it be different? There would be no type attributed to the function?
16:23 <monochrom> Non-function vs function.
16:25 <elito25> oh... so this func x = x + 1000 would be closer
16:25 <elito25> is there a way of setting default parameters?
16:25 <monochrom> No. No improvement.
16:25 sigmundv__ joined
16:25 <elito25> how so?
16:25 <monochrom> Default parameter is beside the point. The point is you are comparing a non-function with a function.
16:26 <monochrom> (let x = 10 in x + 1000) equals 1010. Equal, not return. Equal.
16:26 justinfokes joined
16:27 <elito25> If I placed that in a file and loaded it into ghci, wouldnt func x = x + 1000 constitute a function?
16:28 <monochrom> "int func (int x = 10) { return x + 1000; }" means func = ( \(x with default 10) -> x + 1000 ). func is a function. It does not equal 1010. This is still true with default parameter.
16:29 <monochrom> Yes, func is a function.
16:29 <monochrom> (let x = 10 in x + 1000) is not a function.
16:30 <elito25> Thanks for helping me understnad
16:30 <monochrom> Haskell does not have default parameter. But OCaml does. And what I have said still holds for OCaml.
16:40 zaltekk joined
16:44 <zaltekk> is the haskell book in the topic recommended for experienced (non-functional) programmers?
16:46 <qu1j0t3> zaltekk: Yes.
16:46 <zaltekk> qu1j0t3: okay, thanks
16:46 <qu1j0t3> yw
16:51 Deide joined
16:55 ebw joined
16:57 <ebw> Hi there, trying the morse example from haskellbook and I am getting this error message: <command line>: cannot satisfy -package morse-0.1.0.0 when i type stack ghci morse:tests. Which files should I paste to lpaste.net, so you could help me if you wanted to?
16:57 <ebw> the binary builds fine though
16:58 cschneid_ joined
17:00 <MarcelineVQ> most likely your cabal file
17:01 carlomagno1 joined
17:01 <lpaste> ebw pasted β€œmorse.cabal file” at http://lpaste.net/4026219514273202176
17:01 <ebw> done
17:03 juanpaucar joined
17:05 <MarcelineVQ> hmm, looks pretty normal, what does stack test say?
17:07 <ebw> runs fine and did run the tests ...
17:07 <ebw> ?
17:08 juanpaucar joined
17:12 <MarcelineVQ> not sure what could be the issue there for ghci, that looks like correct syntax too :( what happens if you retry stack ghci morse:tests or try stack ghci :tests or try stack ghci --test morse:tests
17:13 kritzcreek joined
17:13 ebw joined
17:15 carlomagno joined
17:18 <ebw> can it be that stack and cabal are hell on earth? feels a bit like dll hell to me
17:20 <lpaste> ebw pasted β€œcabal stack” at http://lpaste.net/355481
17:20 <ebw> cabal has some zlib compression error and stack tells me it doesn't have a version between 0.1 and 0.2 but only a version 0.1.0.0 (which should be fine in my opinion?)?
17:22 <MarcelineVQ> the error messages aren't intuitive I'll agree there
17:23 <ebw> hmm so I can't install glirc from source, because some packages ceased to exist?
17:23 contiver joined
17:24 <ebw> Or should I purge hasell from my computer and try a clean stack reinstall ?
17:24 <ebw> sorry meant haskell not hasell
17:25 <MarcelineVQ> no there's no need for that
17:25 <glguy> packages ceased to exist?
17:25 <MarcelineVQ> glirc isn't on stackage so it's not in your chosen resolver, due to that it's not sure what to do to resolve the dependancies it requires
17:26 <ebw> I referred to the errors in http://lpaste.net/355481
17:26 <ebw> oh
17:26 <MarcelineVQ> not sure what that cabal error is, though it looks like a network error
17:28 eacameron joined
17:28 <glguy> ebw: if you download the source and run. stack init --solver --resolver=lts-8
17:29 <MarcelineVQ> just trying some steps atm to reproduce a build plan
17:29 <glguy> it should be able to make a valid environment
17:29 ebw1 joined
17:29 <ebw1> sorry my computer crashed
17:29 <glguy> ebw: if you download the source and run. stack init --solver --resolver=lts-8
17:30 <MarcelineVQ> yep as glguy is saying, something like, stack unpack glirc && cd glirc-2.20.6/ && stack init --solver && stack install
17:30 <glguy> it should be able to make a valid environment
17:30 chlong joined
17:30 <glguy> brb
17:31 <ebw1> Can I just clone the git repo and do stack init --solver --resolver=lts-8 in there ?
17:31 <MarcelineVQ> sure
17:32 <ebw1> It says it will need external packages ... what does that mean?
17:32 <MarcelineVQ> it means it needs to fetch packages from hackage that aren't in the resolver, which is what --solver will take care of
17:33 <ebw> ah ok, thanks
17:33 <ebw> I got: cabal: failed to parse output of 'ghc-pkg dump'
17:33 fotonzade joined
17:34 <MarcelineVQ> hum, that's no fun, what's the full output
17:35 <ebw> moment, retrying
17:36 <lpaste> ebw pasted β€œfull output ” at http://lpaste.net/355482
17:36 <ebw> pasted it
17:37 <glguy> your version of the cabal executable is probably too old
17:37 ekasc joined
17:37 <ebw> Ah. So I should deinstall all the haskel stuff from my distro (debian 8) and install via stack ?
17:37 NeverDie joined
17:37 <glguy> ghc 8 changed its package information format
17:38 <glguy> yeah, using distro packages is an all or nothing affair
17:39 <glguy> or
17:39 <glguy> just ask if MarcelineVQ will share the generated stack.yaml for now
17:39 <glguy> there are not that many extra deps
17:40 <MarcelineVQ> sure http://lpaste.net/2702302197537832960
17:42 <glguy> hold on, I'll send you one, I'm back at my computer
17:42 <glguy> stack isn't good at using nightly resolvers
17:42 <glguy> it doesn't know how to handle build tools
17:43 <glguy> http://lpaste.net/5786034904420581376
17:44 eacameron joined
17:44 <ebw> in which file do i need to place that content?
17:44 <glguy> which means if you don't have happy and alex globally installed your build will fail
17:44 <glguy> stack.yaml
17:44 <ebw> What are happy or alex?
17:46 <ebw> so purges distro packages and running stack install cabal-install now
17:47 <glguy> happy is a parser generator
17:47 <glguy> Alex is a lexer generator
17:50 <glguy> ebw: questions here are fine. also there is #haskell-irc if you have glirc specific questions
17:56 jorris joined
18:07 systemfault joined
18:07 smwangi joined
18:17 juanpaucar joined
18:17 jud joined
18:26 delexi joined
18:26 Rodya_ joined
18:39 juanpaucar joined
18:42 seanparsons joined
18:52 yellowj joined
18:53 <ebw> stack install happy did work, but stack install Alex or stack install alex tells me there is no such package. Again a hackage/stackage thing?
18:55 <ebw> when i did stack install happy (for example) where do i find the sources of happy on my computer now?
19:08 <hexagoxel> ebw: i think you misunderstand the purpose of "stack install". you don't have to (nor can) manually install dependencies. And the focus for installing deps is on allowing to build, not as a tool for a human reader. Afaict stack does not even keep the sources around, not even internally.
19:10 <hexagoxel> there is "stack unpack" which i think has that purpose.
19:10 shainer left
19:10 <hexagoxel> the reason that "stack install happy" worked is that it installed the "happy" executable. alex does not have an executable, i'd strongly assume.
19:13 <hexagoxel> (disclaimer: i have a lot of experience with cabal and its inner workings and don't follow the stack changelog closely.)
19:16 <glguy> alex and happy both have executables
19:16 <glguy> there is a stack bug where it can only manage happy and Alex for you when using some resolvers and not others
19:17 <ebw> I now get OpenSSL.hsc:55:16: error: β€˜X509_CHECK_FLAG_NO_PARTIAL_WILDCARDS’ undeclared ?
19:18 <ebw> while it tries to build something called Hookup as far as i can tell
19:20 <glguy> that means your openSSL is outdated
19:21 <glguy> old openSSL can't validate hostnames
19:21 <ebw> maybe i should switch from debian 8 to some other distro ?
19:22 <glguy> do they have an updated packed
19:25 jorris joined
19:26 <ebw> doesn't look like it for the stable branch. It is 1.0.1t in stable and 1.1.0e in testing, would 1.1.0e be sufficient?
19:27 Rodya_ joined
19:28 <ebw> woa 1.0.1 should not be used according to openssl.org ... hmm debian doesn't look so good here.
19:28 <ebw> sorry for non haskell noise
19:31 Levex joined
19:36 Guanin joined
19:44 jorris joined
19:45 smwangi joined
19:50 zero_byte joined
19:54 ebw joined
19:57 juanpaucar joined
20:01 Rodya_ joined
20:02 <glguy> ebw I'll be back able to help soon
20:02 juanpaucar joined
20:04 mengu joined
20:10 <glguy> ebw: openSSL 1.1.0 is definitely new enough
20:10 <glguy> i don't remember which letters in the 1.0 series added that functionality
20:10 <glguy> I thinking it was k but I need to check
20:11 justinfokes joined
20:14 <ebw> glguy: Thanks. I don't need to know, as I can choose between debian 8 and testing and then that are the two versions of openssl i can use ... maybe I switch to arch linux
20:15 netheranthem joined
20:22 <thang1> Arch linux is pretty great
20:22 <thang1> 1.1.0.e-1 is the package version in my repo for arch linux.
20:23 <thang1> ebw: https://www.openssl.org/news/openssl-1.1.0-notes.html Did you look through this?
20:26 takle_ joined
20:30 justinfokes joined
20:44 cschneid_ joined
20:46 ebw joined
20:46 m3tti joined
20:46 cschneid_ joined
20:48 cschneid_ joined
20:51 cschneid_ joined
20:53 NeverDie joined
21:00 juanpaucar joined
21:04 levex_ joined
21:07 ebw joined
21:12 salios joined
21:17 simendsjo joined
21:30 kadoban joined
21:32 Zialus joined
21:35 mojjo joined
21:52 hiratara joined
21:53 louispan joined
21:55 kadoban joined
22:29 moei joined
22:31 hiratara joined
22:35 Rodya_ joined
22:41 juanpaucar joined
22:48 <thang1> https://monad.cat/posts/2016-05-10-barbed-wire.html does anyone know if there was ever a second part to this? I still have no idea wtf I'm looking at regarding recursion schemes but it looks fascinating
22:50 <monochrom> Aw. Curiosity killed the cat.
22:52 <thang1> lol, I can afford to be nerd sniped every now and then
22:53 <monochrom> I mean monadcat never wrote part 2 because curiosity killed it.
22:53 Levex joined
22:54 <Cale> http://doc.utwente.nl/56289/1/meijer91functional.pdf
22:54 carlomagno1 joined
22:54 <Cale> That's the original paper which the title of that post is referring to
22:54 <Cale> It's a bit of a notational experiment
22:55 <Cale> -- but the ideas have maintained their relevance.
22:56 Rodya_ joined
22:56 <Cale> http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.41.125&rep=rep1&type=pdf -- bit nicer PDF
22:57 kritzcreek joined
22:58 carlomagno joined
23:01 <thang1> Yeah I looked at that pdf once
23:01 <thang1> it's like 90% incomprehensible to me but I'm getting there slowly, I think
23:01 cschneid_ joined
23:04 <thang1> "this is a paper who is most often called 'impenetrable'..." ahh, so I'm not crazy
23:05 louispan joined
23:14 conal joined
23:21 zero_byte joined
23:26 conal joined
23:29 prophile joined
23:46 juanpaucar joined
23:50 cschneid_ joined