Start with the spelling. :) data GADT a where Constructor0 :: Field a -> Field b -> GADT (a, b) Constructor1 :: ... ...
There's luakit, uzbl, surf and jumanji from the top of my head, but I don't think any of these have "full interoperability with the CLI". luakit is definitely my favourite as it has been much more reliable than uzbl and…
No, ghc produces statically linked binaries by default (-dynamic if you don't like that).
You don't have to syntactically consume all of arguments of a function to write its body. f :: a -> Int -> Int -> Int f x = (+) There really isn't anything meaningful to do with a function before it has…
I don't understand this point. If you have arguments x and y that you want to apply to this function, I don't see the problem in "using them directly". Function application in Haskell is first class. If you have f :: x…
This gives me an idea for a scanf-like QuasiQuoter...
I'm the author of this post, it was a joke. I said "For those who have no idea what they're doing 90% of the time when they are in bash" very sarcastically, but obviously this wasn't conveyed very well, sorry. edit: I…
Start with the spelling. :) data GADT a where Constructor0 :: Field a -> Field b -> GADT (a, b) Constructor1 :: ... ...
There's luakit, uzbl, surf and jumanji from the top of my head, but I don't think any of these have "full interoperability with the CLI". luakit is definitely my favourite as it has been much more reliable than uzbl and…
No, ghc produces statically linked binaries by default (-dynamic if you don't like that).
You don't have to syntactically consume all of arguments of a function to write its body. f :: a -> Int -> Int -> Int f x = (+) There really isn't anything meaningful to do with a function before it has…
I don't understand this point. If you have arguments x and y that you want to apply to this function, I don't see the problem in "using them directly". Function application in Haskell is first class. If you have f :: x…
This gives me an idea for a scanf-like QuasiQuoter...
I'm the author of this post, it was a joke. I said "For those who have no idea what they're doing 90% of the time when they are in bash" very sarcastically, but obviously this wasn't conveyed very well, sorry. edit: I…