ON THE MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS OF LEARNING (PDF) - http://www.ams.org/bull...

BULLETIN (New Series) OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 39, Number 1, Pages 1{49 S 0273-0979(01)00923-5 Article electronically published on October 5, 2001 FELIPE CUCKER AND STEVE SMALE
- Paul Delhanty

Algorithms in Real Algebraic Geometry - http://www.math.purdue.edu/~sbasu...

by Saugata Basu, Richard Pollack, Marie-Françoise Roy Publisher Springer-Verlag version book-bpr-posted1 from 11/03/06
- Paul Delhanty

A General Framework for Statistical Anlaysis of Sequential Dyadic Interaction Data (PDF) - http://owen.vanderbilt.edu/vanderb...

Scanned (low quality) PDF Psychological Bulletin 1988 Vol. 103, No. 3, 379-390
- Paul Delhanty

Gmane -- Re: Comparison of functional dependencies and type families - http://article.gmane.org/gmane...

From: Manuel M T Chakravarty <chak <at> cse.unsw.edu.au> Subject: Re: Comparison of functional dependencies and type families [was: Re: Type families not as useful over functions] Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cafe
- Paul Delhanty

Haskell hacking - Vim Script to Infer Types - http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons...

Type declarations made mechanical
- Paul Delhanty

Introduction to Extremal Graph Theory (PDF) - http://www.math-inst.hu/~miki...

Mikl´os Simonovits Alfr´ed R´enyi Mathematical Institute Budapest
- Paul Delhanty

Boost Phoenix - Composite - Scopes - http://spirit.sourceforge.net/dl_docs...

Hat Tip to @psnively (Twitter) @delhanty Sorry, in Phoenix 2.0 they're called Scopes. 28 minutes ago from twitterrific in reply to delhanty @delhanty Yes. I was trying to find my review, and failed, but: Boost already had Lambda and Phoenix, and FC++ was quite monolithic 33 minutes ago from twitterrific in reply to delhanty @delhanty Full disclosure: I also voted against FC++'s adoption. about 1 hour ago from twitterrific in reply to delhanty @delhanty Phoenix is interesting because it supports true hardware stack closures. It lacks FC++'s monads, though. about 1 hour ago from twitterrific in reply to delhanty
- Paul Delhanty