A New Notation for Arrows

[bft]

On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 02:55:49PM +0100, bft wrote:
> Is there any version of Haskell (Hugs or Ghc) which includes the new
> notation of arrows introduced by Ross Paterson ?  Instead, where can I get

> it ? The Control.Arrow.hs file did not include the new notation of
> arrows.

Ross Paterson wrote :
> It's supported by GHC 6.2 and later, with the -farrows option

>(see the GHC User's Guide).  To use arrow notation with Hugs or
> any other Haskell implementation, you need the arrows preprocessor
>(http://www.haskell.org/arrows/download.html
).

Thank you for your prompt answer.

I tried to download the  x86/Linux Binary Release
arrowp-0.5-linux-i386.tgz at
http://www.haskell.org/arrows/download.html ; but it failed with this
message :
"Not Found
The requested URL /arrows/arrowp-0.5-linux-i386.tgz was not found on
this server."

I tried the Unix Source Release: arrowp-0.5-src.tgz, but I failed when
building it on my Linux Fedora Core 6 system.
I have a ghc-6.6.1 Haskell compiler and the Hugs98 (march 2005 version)
Haskell interpreter.

Thanks again for your help.
Bernard Fotsing Talla



_______________________________________________
Hugs-Users mailing list
Hugs-Users@...
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/hugs-users

[Ross Paterson]

On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 08:07:13PM +0100, bft wrote:

> I tried to download the  x86/Linux Binary Release
> arrowp-0.5-linux-i386.tgz at
> http://www.haskell.org/arrows/download.html ; but it failed with this
> message :
> "Not Found
> The requested URL /arrows/arrowp-0.5-linux-i386.tgz was not found on
> this server."
>
> I tried the Unix Source Release: arrowp-0.5-src.tgz, but I failed when
> building it on my Linux Fedora Core 6 system.
> I have a ghc-6.6.1 Haskell compiler and the Hugs98 (march 2005 version)
> Haskell interpreter.

I've fixed the binary link, but you might as well use GHC for arrows.
If you use the preprocessor, scope errors or type errors will be harder
to track down, as they'll be reported against the preprocessor output,
which is rather obfuscated.  GHC will report them against the source
you wrote.
_______________________________________________
Hugs-Users mailing list
Hugs-Users@...
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/hugs-users

[Benjamin L.Russell]

Are there any plans to fix the preprocessor or update
Hugs so that scope errors or type errors will be
reported against the source code, rather than against
the preprocessor output?  That would render debugging
with new notation for arrows just as easy to
accomplish with Hugs as with GHC.

-- Benjamin L. Russell

--- Ross Paterson <ross@...> wrote:

> ....
>
> I've fixed the binary link, but you might as well
> use GHC for arrows.
> If you use the preprocessor, scope errors or type
> errors will be harder
> to track down, as they'll be reported against the
> preprocessor output,
> which is rather obfuscated.  GHC will report them
> against the source
> you wrote.
> _______________________________________________
> Hugs-Users mailing list
> Hugs-Users@...
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/hugs-users
>

_______________________________________________
Hugs-Users mailing list
Hugs-Users@...
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/hugs-users

[Ross Paterson]

On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 09:07:27PM -0700, Benjamin L. Russell wrote:
> Are there any plans to fix the preprocessor or update
> Hugs so that scope errors or type errors will be
> reported against the source code, rather than against
> the preprocessor output?

No, there are no such plans.
_______________________________________________
Hugs-Users mailing list
Hugs-Users@...
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/hugs-users