dominictarr

Hey everyone - this is not just a one off thing, there are likely to be many other modules in your dependency trees that are now a burden to their authors. I didn't create this code for altruistic motivations, I created it for fun. I was learning, and learning is fun. I gave it away because it was easy to do so, and because sharing helps learning too. I think most of the small modules on npm were created for reasons like this. However, that was a long time ago. I've since moved on from this module and moved on from that thing too and in the process of moving on from that as well. I've written way better modules than this, the internet just hasn't fully caught up.

@broros

otherwise why would he hand over a popular package to a stranger?

If it's not fun anymore, you get literally nothing from maintaining a popular package.

One time, I was working as a dishwasher in a restu

parsonsmatt

The question of "How do I design my application in Haskell?" comes up a lot. There's a bunch of perspectives and choices, so it makes sense that it's difficult to choose just one. Do I use plain monad transformers, mtl, just pass the parameters manually and use IO for everything, the ReaderT design pattern, free monads, freer monads, some other kind of algebraic effect system?!

The answer is: why not both/all?

Lately, I've been centering on a n application design architecture with roughly three layers:

Layer 1:

newtype AppT m a = AppT { unAppT :: ReaderT YourStuff m a } deriving ............ The ReaderT Design Pattern, essentially. This is what everything gets boiled down to, and what everything eventually gets interpreted in. This type is the backbone of your app. For some components, you carry around some info/state (consider [MonadMetrics](https://hackage

mtesseract

The Problem

Defining records in Haskell causes accessor functions for the record's fields to be defined. There is no seperate namespace for these accessor functions.

The Goal

Be able to

• use records in Haskell, which share field names.
• use lenses for accessing these fields

drexin

import java.io.File
import language.experimental.macros
import scala.reflect.macros.Context

object Macros {

  def LINE: Int = macro lineImpl

  def lineImpl(c: Context): c.Expr[Int] = {
    import c.universe._

tonymorris

object SKI_Applicative {
/*
First, let's talk about the SK combinator calculus and how it contributes to solving your problem.

The SK combinator calculus is made of two functions (aka combinators): S and K. It is sometimes called the SKI combinator calculus, however, the I combinator can be derived from S and K. The key observation of SK is that it is a turing-complete system and therefore, anything that can be expressed as SK is also turing-complete. Here is a demonstration that Scala's type system is turing-complete (and therefore, undecidable) for example[1].

The K combinator is the most trivial of the two. It is sometimes called "const" (as in Haskell). There is also some discussion about its evaluation strategy in Scala and how to best express it[2]. The K function might be paraphrased as, "takes a value and returns a (constant) unary function that always returns that value."
*/
  def k[A, B]: A => B => A =
    a => _ => a

mslinn

#!/bin/bash

echo "Direct dependencies"
sbt 'show all-dependencies' | \
  gawk 'match($0, /List\((.*)\)/, a) {print a[1]}' | \
  tr -d ' ' | tr ',' '\n' | sort -t ':' | \
  tr ':' '\t' | expand -t 30

echo -e "\nAll dependencies, including transitive dependencies"
sbt 'show managed-classpath' | tr -d ' ' | tr ',' '\n' | \

channingwalton

import scala.xml.NodeSeq

object RenderExample {

  object Model {

    trait Toy
    case class Bike extends Toy
    case class Train extends Toy

raichoo

case class Config(host: String, port: Int) {
  def prettyPrint(prefix: String, msg: String): String =
    List(prefix, ": ", msg, " on ", host, ":", port.toString).mkString
}

/**
  * Passing a configuration with implicits is like
  * working in the state monad. You can "put" a
  * new configuration even though we don't want that
  * to happen in this particular example. We don't 

chrislewis

trait Bind[M[_]] {
  def fmap[A, B](ma: M[A], f: A => B): M[B]

  def bind[A, B](ma: M[A], f: A => M[B]): M[B]
}

trait Monad[M[_]] extends Bind[M]{

  def unit[A](a: => A): M[A]

chrislewis

package necsala.embedded

import scala.tools.nsc.interpreter.AbstractFileClassLoader
import scala.tools.nsc.{Global, Settings}
import scala.tools.nsc.util.BatchSourceFile
import scala.tools.nsc.io.{AbstractFile, VirtualDirectory}
import java.io.File
import java.util.jar.JarFile
import java.net.URLClassLoader