Here is the latest Caml Weekly News, for the week of July 22 to August 26, 2008.
Sorry for the long hiatus. I have moved in and I'm now ready to get back to caml news. Time to catch up!
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/03e42ce999db1dd3#Continuing the thread from a month ago, Nicolas Pouillard said:
Two key points that helped me: * Monads help to separate some plumbing from your code. * Monads provide a way to abstract code over some "let" construct. I will note that specific "let" construct "let!", it's somewhat like the do-notation but more atomic. Monads also come with "return", but that's not the essence of them. Think about that example: val div : int -> int -> int option val square : int -> option let f x y = match div x y with | None -> None (* here 'y' was equal to 0 *) | Some z -> match square z with | None -> None | Some x2 -> Some x2 In the previous example the plumbing is error handling (where errors are represented by None), and the "let!" construct is: let! x = e1 in e2 ===> match e1 with None -> None | Some x -> e2 And "return" is "Some". Another similar example: type ('a,'b) either = Left of 'a | Right of 'b val div : int -> int -> (string, int) either val square : int -> (string, int) either let f x y = match div x y with | Left error_msg -> Left error_msg | Right z -> match square z with | Left error_msg -> Left error_msg | Right x2 -> Right x2 Here the plumbing is still there for "error handling", but is somewhat different. The "let!" construct is: let! x = e1 in e2 ===> match e1 with Left m -> Left m | Right x -> e2 And "return" is "Right". Finally one could have used the "let!" construct abstractly (and also "return"). let f x y = let! z = div x y in let! x2 = square z in return x2 One can obtain the two previous versions by choosing which "let!"/"return" we want, namely choosing the monad.Dario Teixeira said:
Some months ago someone posted a comment on the Programming Reddit that brilliantly summarises monads. It's the best intro I've read so far: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/info/64th1/comments/c02u9mbChristophe Troestler said:
You may want to take a look to http://cufp.galois.com/2007/slides/ChrisWaterson.ppt for an actual use of monads in a concrete product.
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/07b5c913607a7933#Atkinson Julian asked and Oleg answered:
> Is it likely that this package may be incorporated into a later official > relase of ocaml (ie receive first class support ) ?. continuations would > appear to offer considerable programming expressiveness even if not widely > supported in other languages (cf scheme). The library delimcc is a pure library in the sense it does not patch OCaml in any way. Therefore, it does not have to be incorporated into the official release of OCaml. There are many very useful OCaml libraries (Core or Extlib to name a few) that will never be part of the official release. Since Inria does not have many resources to devote to OCaml, they rather concentrate on the compiler and the basic run-time system, and leave the libraries to the community. Incidentally, GHC Haskell system is being developed in a similar fashion. > And a very basic tech question - It is obviously necessary that the package > runs as interpreted bytecode - so that the activation record of the > function/closure may be saved/serialized off. Although the current delimcc library does support bytecode only, that is not the fundamental limitation. It is possible in principle to capture and resume continuations in ocamlopt-compiled programs. That is, however, quite more involved, requires the use of frame tables, etc. There has not been much interest in ocamlopt-delimited continuations to justify the development. Incidentally, a new version of the library http://okmij.org/ftp/packages/caml-shift.tar.gz just has been released, with many optimizations reducing the size of captured continuations. The original library was not optimized at all.
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/e02b5d17b39f1e53#Dawid Toton asked:
Let's look at my OCaml program as a poset of function applications. Some its elements throw exceptions. I need to evaluate all applications except of those that 'Follow' exception-throwing ones. This 'Follow' corresponds to the ordering in my poset. Unfortunately standard tools allow only to do this with 'Follow' corresponding to some total order. Could you give me some advice how to evaluate really all applications that precede throwing an exception? ---------- Full story I have many similar programs that do calculations for me. Some steps are very computationally heavy. Every such function do_heavy_thing starts another process (on other computer) and throws an exception that means "the result will be available later". Everything that relies on this result of do_heavy_thing cannot be evaluated. And it won't be because I don't catch the exception. So I run my programs repeatedly. I correct and extend them while heavy_thing is done somewhere else (usually for few days). do_heavy_thing checks for the result. If it's finished at the moment of execution, it downloads the data and returns. Then the data undergoes some cheap transformations and some next do_heavy_thing function can be called. Every time I execute the program I get some more useful output and "Fatal error: exception ..." message. So far this scheme worked very well. This is basically breaking the calculation at some point with respect to a total order (the order of source code). Some calculations should be done in parallel, since there are many of them. I solved this problem with run_many adapter: firstly collect a list of heavy calculations, then execute them as a one node in the total order of evaluation. Currently I hit the following problem: my new programs (call them 'Calcs') are too complex to apply the evasion with run_many. So my latest calculations are done one-by-one. This is so bad, that I can spend several days in order to solve this in a systematical way. These Calcs are managed by other set of OCaml tools. I have complete control over all the code. The tools already do tiny changes to Calcs with simple string operations, not real syntax extension. I hope some witty preprocessor can help. I have no idea what code the syntax extension should produce. My first guess is to wrap everything in type 'a wrapped = Exception | Value 'a and make all aplications evaluated. But this seems to be a big headache. Maybe this is well-known, already solved problem? Any ideas?Gabriel Kerneis replied:
The wrapping you describe looks a lot like a monad, and your problem definitely looks like having many (cooperative) threads, some of them needing to be detached (because they are blocking). You could have a look at http://ocsigen.org/lwt and adapt it to suit your needs. Pay attention in particular to the detach() function. Please, note I might be seeing monads and continuation-passing style everywhere, since this is my current research topic.Xavier Leroy also replied:
Could you give me some advice how to evaluate really all applications that precede throwing an exception? I'm not sure I fully understand what you're trying to achieve, but I'm reminded of "futures", a construct for parallel computation that was popular in the Lisp world in the 80's. The classic reference is Halstead's Multilisp system: http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~fischer/cs538.s04/multilisp.pdf In a nutshell, a future is like a lazy value, but the underlying computation is evaluated speculatively in parallel with the main program, rather than waiting until its value is needed as in the case of lazy evaluation.Dawid Toton then added:
Let me show an example of what I exactly mean. I start with a code: 1: let a = heavy 1 2: let b = heavy 2 3: let c = report (a + b) 4: let d = heavy 4 5: let e = heavy d Then I want to translate it automatically so that three applications of heavy are evaluated (lines 1, 2, 4). The addition a + b won't be evaluated untill a and b are successfully returned. It's easier to get only two heavy operations started at once: 0: type 'a future_t = 'a Lazy.t 1: let a = future heavy 1 2: let b = future heavy 2 3: let c = report ((force a) + (force b)) 4: let d = future heavy 4 5: let e = future heavy (force d) Computation of c hangs or throws an exception. Hence lines 4 an 5 are not executed. So I think I need some more invasive transformarion: 0: type 'a future_t = 'a Lazy.t 1: let a = future heavy 1 2: let b = future heavy 2 3: let c = lazy (report (force a) + (force b)) 4: let d = future heavy 4 5: let e = future heavy (force d) 6: let _ = force c In this case we have a problem: line 5 throws an exception, so report in line 3 is not executed even if first two heavy operations are finished. The function report could even contain some other heavy operations that need to be started as soon as possible. So I can conctruct a tree of deferred computations, but probably I can't force it to do as much as possible. Forcing is governed by total order. Let's consider: 7: let f = foo (force c) (force e) If one of arguments fails first, the other is not forced. This is bad. So I go to the original idea: thread the exception across everything. Wrap with variant instead of Lazy.t. 0: type 'a lifted_t = Exception | Value 'a 1: let a = start heavy 1 2: let b = start heavy 2 3: let c = bind2 (fun a b -> return (report (a+b))) a b 4: let d = start heavy 4 5: let e = bind1 (fun d -> start heavy d) d 7: let f = bind2 (fun c e -> return (foo c e)) c e Function 'start' starts calculation and returns Exception or returns Value result if it's available. bindX functions evaluate the function passed as a parameter if all arguments are Values. Is is easy to lift every heavy call to 'start heavy arg arg arg ...' - since in any case I have to distinguish heavy functions manually. I need to decide about granularity of bindX incrustation. I can have some modules marked as 'nondeterministic' and leave the other ones untouched. I could wrap into lifted_t all single values in 'nondeterministic' modules. This would mean placing bindX for every integer addition, every string concatenation... I need rules: where should I place bindX and return in the original code. At the moment I don't know. I have looked at the Lwt library - as far as I understand in my case the idea boils down to threading something across all expressions.Christophe Troestler then suggested:
You may want to have a look to http://enfranchisedmind.com/blog/2007/08/06/a-monad-tutorial-for-ocaml/ especially the "Russian Nesting Doll Monads" section for ideas.
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/b46ad785eeff71e1#Martin Jambon announced:
I am pleased to announce the availability of Micmatch for the new Camlp4. The new package is called "Mikmatch", with a K. "Micmatch" with a C refers to the original implementation which now uses Camlp5. http://martin.jambon.free.fr/micmatch.html or GODI if you want to jump directly to the installation. Micmatch is a Camlp4 syntax extension that allows to use regexps in match-with constructs. Compilation of the underlying PCRE or Str regexp is done transparently, just once. The syntax of the regexps is reminiscent of ocamllex. For those who are not familiar with ocamllex, this syntax is very OCaml-friendly and in particular avoids backslash headaches. This is a double announcement: micmatch-1.0.0 (stable except for possibly some packaging issues): Legacy implementation, slightly modified to work with Camlp5 (thanks to John Gregorski for the patch). mikmatch-1.0.0 (beta quality): Partial reimplementation that supports Camlp4 3.10 aka the "new Camlp4". Currently there is no toplevel support. For details on the changes, see http://martin.jambon.free.fr/mikmatch-changes.txt Have fun, program safely, and please report problems to email@example.com (archive at http://groups.google.com/group/micmatch ) Thanks to the OCamlForge team for providing free and worry-free hosting.
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/78b120aebfae5205#Maurice Bremond announced:
Here is an updated version for ocaml >= 3.10 with *Camlp5* : http://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/4062/ocamlmex-2.1.0.tar.gz (from http://ocamlmex.gforge.inria.fr/) It has been tested with Matlab 2007b, 2008a and Octave on a Ubuntu Hardy (Ocaml 3.10.1, Camlp5 5.04 (transitional mode), Octave 3.0) For any trouble with this, please mail me directly.
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/9f98fdc2278eb869#blue storm announced:
mfp and I are pleased to announce the first public release of pa_where, a camlp4 extension enabling backward declarations. The "where" keyword, available in the revised syntax, and one of the truly missed Caml-light friends, is back. The syntax, however, is slightly different from the usual one : "where" should be followed by another declarative keyword, such as "let" : a where let a = b It is possible to use the "where let" form inside expressions, and the "where val" form at toplevel (structure items). Having a different syntaxic form for toplevel and local declarations is not the classical syntax standard, but was needed for disambiguation issues. It is however possible to use the good old "where a = b" syntax : in absence of any declarative keyword, the "let" keyword is used as default. The revised syntax "where" is restricted because of the "dangling and" issue. pa_where has no such restriction (what's one more ambiguity in the classical syntax anyway ?). Here are the two ambiguous cases : a where b where c => (a where b) where c let a = b where c and d => let a = (b where c and d) It would be possible to extend the backward declarations to other constructions such as "where module" or "where type". If you see any use for it, do not hesitate to ask for the feature or send a patch. The final syntax, wich I think is a good compromise, is the result of a debate on the #ocaml IRC channel (Freenode). If you are about to write a syntax extension yourself, you should really consider discussing your syntax considerations there (or maybe on the mailing-list ?) : it is amazing how helpful such a debate can be on a so subjective question. Thanks in advance for any testing, comment, criticism, request or patch. URL : http://bluestorm.info/camlp4/pa_where/list.php Available archives (test and META files included) : - http://bluestorm.info/camlp4/pa_where/pa_where-0.4-.tar.gz - http://bluestorm.info/camlp4/pa_where/pa_where-0.4-.zip Highlighted HTML source for online reading : - http://bluestorm.info/camlp4/pa_where/pa_where.ml.html
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/f35452d085654bd6#Richard Jones asked and Yitzhak Mandelbaum answered:
> Maybe a simple question, but does camlp4 have functions to turn > expr and patt AST structures to and from strings? I don't know about the new camlp4, but in the old one the code looked something like this (where my AST is a list of str_item-s): open Pcaml let ast_to_strings ast = List.map (function str_item -> string_of pr_str_item str_item) astChristophe Troestler also answered:
Parsing: open Camlp4.PreCast let loc = Loc.ghost;; Syntax.AntiquotSyntax.parse_expr loc "x = 1";; Syntax.AntiquotSyntax.parse_patt loc "Failure _";; Printing: I do not know a way to print to a string, only to a file. I guess this asymmetry is due to the fact that a string output was never needed... (but it would be useful to me too!) Moreover, you can only print str_item's, so you have to wrap your expr and patt. E.g. let e = <:expr< 1 + 1 >>;; Printers.OCaml.print_implem ~output_file:"/tmp/o.ml" <:str_item< $exp: e$ >>;; (* will print let _ = 1 + 1;; *) Printers.OCaml.print_implem ~output_file:"/tmp/o.ml" (let _loc = Ast.loc_of_expr e in Ast.StExp(_loc, e));; (* will print 1 + 1;; (but I do not know whether this is a feature!) *)Jeremy Yallop also answered:
One way to do it is to use the Camlp4.Printers module. To illustrate the idea, here's a complete working program that prints out all expressions found in a file. open Camlp4.PreCast open Syntax (* Instantiate the module that allows us to print AST values. This gives us an object with methods `expr', `patt', etc., each with type `Format.formatter -> t -> unit'. *) let printer = let module P = Camlp4.Printers.OCaml.Make(Syntax) in new P.printer () (* Transform a formatter function into a to_string function. *) let format_to_string (f : Format.formatter -> 'a -> unit) (v : 'a) : string = let buf = Buffer.create 128 in let fmt = Format.formatter_of_buffer buf in let () = f fmt v in let () = Format.pp_print_flush fmt () in Buffer.contents buf (* Some to_string functions for particular AST types. *) let expr_of_string : Ast.expr -> string = format_to_string printer#expr let patt_of_string : Ast.patt -> string = format_to_string printer#patt (* A "filter" that prints out expressions encountered in the AST (top-down). *) let print_stuff = object inherit Ast.map as super method expr e = let () = print_endline ("expr: "^ expr_of_string e) in super#expr e end (* Register the filter with camlp4 *) let () = AstFilters.register_str_item_filter print_stuff#str_item Compile: ocamlc -c -I +camlp4 print.ml Run: camlp4of print.cmo file.ml
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/46f6603351a7b3b4#Richard Jones announced:
[Perhaps people wonder what I do at Red Hat. Copied below is an announcement of some virtualization management tools that we wrote in OCaml. This might be interesting to people on this list because it heavily uses DSLs written in camlp4 and other camlp4 features such as "Reflective OCaml". It's also a real world program specifically designed to be used by system administrators who, frankly, won't care about implementation details but will only care that it works. If you want to find out about the many other management tools I'm writing please go to http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ As with all Red Hat software, this is Free and open source, and I'd like to encourage anyone to contribute back patches, suggestions and documentation.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm pleased to announce the latest release of the virt-mem tools, version 0.2.8. These are tools for system administrators which let you find things like kernel messages, process lists and network information of your guests. For example: virt-uname 'uname' command, shows OS version, architecture, etc. virt-dmesg 'dmesg' command, shows kernel messages virt-ps 'ps' command, shows process list Nothing needs to be installed in the guest for this to work, and the tools are specifically designed to allow easy scripting and integration with databases and monitoring systems. Source is available from the web page here: http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-mem/ The latest version (0.2.8) reworks the internals substantially so that we have direct access to basically any kernel structure, and this will allow us to quickly add the remaining features that people have asked for (memory usage information, lists of network interfaces and so on). As usual, patches, feedback, suggestions etc. are very welcome! Binaries will be available in Fedora 10 (Rawhide) at some point soon.
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/d30afbc4d16299f8#Ben Aurel asked and Alain Frisch replied:
> - is it possible to dynamically load bytecode libraries into a bytecode program? Yes: http://caml.inria.fr/pub/docs/manual-ocaml/manual041.html > - is it possible to dynamically load native libraries into a native program? This will be possible in the next release of OCaml (3.11). The API is the same as for bytecode (Dynlink module), although the model is a little bit different (specific linking phase to produce dynlinkable units). > - is it possible to dynamically load bytecode libraries into a native program? > - is it possible to dynamically load native libraries into a bytecode program? No.
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/4adaa33c66747856#Deep in this long thread, blue storm announced:
Here is a draft of camlp4 extension warning on value shadowing : http://bluestorm.info/camlp4/dev/pf_shadow/list.php You can use it as a preprocessor to your source file, and it will raise warnings on value shadowing. For example (more examples in the test.ml file), your input gives the warning : <W> File "input.ml", line 4, characters 6-8: shadowing binding 'xs' from File "input.ml", line 2, characters 8-10 Recursive bindings are handled, but classes, types and modules are not : it is a reasonable proof of concept, and if somebody is interested in more exhaustiveness, i (or whoever) could probably extend it easily.
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/793cf2291e975233#Pierre-Evariste Dagand announced:
After having delayed this announce for months, I think that Opis is now mature enough to be publicly released. The literate code and a technical report are available here: http://perso.eleves.bretagne.ens-cachan.fr/~dagand/opis/ --------------------------- What Opis is about ? --------------------------- Opis is a toolkit for large-scale distributed system programming. It aims at easing the development of complex and reliable distributed systems by: - embedding a domain-specific language (EDSL) in OCaml: hence offering a reactive, dataflow-oriented programming style while not reinventing the wheel (type-checker, efficient code generation, ...)) - assisting the developer with powerful, integrated tools: network simulator, debugger, model-checker and performance profiler - working with purely-functional constructs: therefore lowering the barrier to certify critical parts of the distributed system in a theorem prover ---------------------- Technical details: ---------------------- The EDSL is based on the Arrow abstraction [http://www.haskell.org/arrows/]. First, the developer defines some pure functions, then abstracts them in the Arrow world and finally wires them together using the Arrow combinators. The resulting function is termed an "event function": it receives input events from the network, the timer or the user interfaces and reacts with output events. Then, these output events are interpreted by the "launcher" subsystem. For instance, the event function might ask to "Send( ip_x , TCP , data )". Thus, the Network Launcher opens a TCP connection to "ip_x", marshals "data" to a string and finally sends it. Internally, the Arrow combinators build a Mealy automaton out of the user-defined pure functions. Interestingly, Mealy automata has been introduced and used by Lamport for decades to describe distributed systems [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_machine_replication]. Hence, there already exists some encouraging, successful formalization of Mealy-based systems [http://coq.inria.fr/contribs/fairisle.html]. We are currently experimenting with Coq to completely develop the event functions in Coq (and to prove non trivial properties about the behavior of the resulting distributed system). Beyond an EDSL, Opis also provides some useful tools to speed-up the development and deployment of event functions. Hence, given an event function and without any modification, we can: - deploy it on a real network - simulate a network executing the event function, to test the behavior of the system "in the large" - debug a network of nodes running the event function, to inspect the system "in the small", with forward and backward execution steps, state inspection, ... - model-check the distributed system against safety properties, featuring a dynamic partial-order reduction mode that avoids the usual combinatorial explosion in most systems - performance-debug the pure functions, by measuring their processing time and inferring their (algorithmic) complexity Finally, by using OCaml and staying in the purely-functional world, we benefit from: - OCaml excellent performances (both on the computational side and on the networking side) as well as its thoroughly tested type-checker - the "code export" capability of theorem provers (Isabelle, Coq, ....): we have been able to certify critical code in Isabelle, export the corresponding code and integrates it smoothly in an existing system - the usual benefit of functional programming: easier (informal) reasoning and testing -------------------------- Acknowledgements -------------------------- I would like to thanks Zheng Li, Oleg Kiselyov and Jacques Garrigue for their help on this list to design an efficient Arrow instance. At this point of this long mail, I think I must also thank the reader that have bravely read up to here ;-)
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/51544aa549645d7e#Richard Jones announced:
We've set up a mailing list to continue discussion of bitstring. It's not just for developers though, if you'd like to ask user-oriented questions too we'd be glad to help. http://groups.google.com/group/bitstring ---------------------------------------- http://code.google.com/p/bitstring/ The ocaml-bitstring project adds Erlang-style bitstrings and matching over bitstrings as a syntax extension and library for OCaml. (This project was formerly known as "bitmatch"). You can use this module to both parse and generate binary formats, files and protocols. Bitstring handling is added as primitives to the language, making it exceptionally simple to use and very powerful.
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.caml/browse_thread/thread/d8a0f5f28b9c55b0#Deep in this thread, Maxence Guesdon said:
Indeed it's a lot of work and I wish I had more time to work on it. Here are some comments about my experience developping Chamo. It's important for me to be able to change the editor/IDE I use without having to change the build process or the organisation of the source files. It's kind of easy to force the developper to use some tools and the way to use them, saying "If you use my wonderful editor, you have to put your code here, use this tool and not this other, etc.". The hard part is to keep flexibility and so to foresee what must be customizable by the user. And this flexibility is required to be able to contribute on projects using different organisations and build processes. For this reason, I never developped a "project manager" in Cameleon, because I did not want to put my includes and other flags (for example) in a specific file and become "cameleon-dependent" (and so for the possible contributors). So I keep on writing Makefiles. (Chamo is part of Cameleon. Cameleon aimed at being an IDE, with documentation browsing, version control, etc., and using Chamo as default source code editor) So my recent efforts were on Chamo, a source code editor, like emacs but written in ocaml and using ocaml rather than elisp to write configuration and extensions. Again, the difficulty is to foresee what the user will want to change because in ocaml a function f cannot be *redefined*: it is possible to define *another* function f, but functions using the first definition will continue to use the first definition, not the new one. So I added "commands" in Chamo, like shell commands. These are only names, and the user can change the ocaml function associated to these names. This allows the user to write the ocaml code which calls its favorite tools and to for example bind this code to the keyboard shortcuts he wants (see examples at ). The GUI represents a big part of the work, even using an existing source code editor widget (gtksourceview). There is a lot of information to keep and display, a lot of things possibly happening. Moreover, as soon as there is interaction with the user, error handling is required at every line... For ocaml-specific aspects: - Chamo uses .annot files to display type information (Alt-t), - ocamlbuild is supported, - errors messages in compilation processes (ocamlbuild, make or any command) are parsed and the cursor is positionned at the location of the error. So I already use Chamo for my daily work (development, edition of text files). What's missing now is access to more information like location of definitions, completion and so on. I'm waiting for the result of ocamlwizard to see how to use these tools in Chamo to provide these missing features. Since these tools will surely need some information about compilation flags, there are two solutions: 1. Add a way to indicate these flags to Chamo/Cameleon, but keep this way flexible so that any user can import them from any other location (makefile, etc.) 2. Use "dump" files to store the results of these tools and Makefile targets to produce them (that the way ocamldoc is used in Cameleon for browsing documentation) Regards, Maxence  http://home.gna.org/cameleon/chamo.en.html  http://home.gna.org/cameleon/snippets.en.html  http://osp.janestcapital.com/files/ocamlwizard.pdfRichard Jones then suggested and Maxence Guesdon replied:
> > So I already use Chamo for my daily work (development, edition of text > > files). What's missing now is access to more information like location of > > definitions, completion and so on. > > You've looked at cmigrep? > > http://caml.inria.fr/cgi-bin/hump.en.cgi?contrib=560 No. I just donwloaded it and indeed it could be used from chamo to provide some more features in a flexible way. Thanks !
Here is a quick trick to help you read this CWN if you are viewing it using vim (version 6 or greater).
If you know of a better way, please let me know.
If you happen to miss a CWN, you can send me a message and I'll mail it to you, or go take a look at the archive or the RSS feed of the archives.
If you also wish to receive it every week by mail, you may subscribe online.