By the way, thanks to Greg for driving this discussion,
please keep up the good work!
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Can you turn your proposal into a Wiki page?
OK I'll try to get to that later today.
It's different to Johan's.
Oh? I didn't realize that. OK, I'll look at it more closely.
I'm
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Yitzchak Gale g...@sefer.org wrote:
By the way, thanks to Greg for driving this discussion,
please keep up the good work!
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Can you turn your proposal into a Wiki page?
OK I'll try to get to that later today.
It's different to
* Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com [2012-01-03 11:00:58+]
I'd be interested in hearing feedback, particularly if you find a
case where costs are attributed somewhere that you didn't expect, or
the stack looks wrong.
What I often find counter-intuitive is how the 'entries' count is
computed.
On 2012-01-16 19:16, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
Allow nested modules. [...]
Perhaps Agda's module/record system can provide some inspiration:
http://wiki.portal.chalmers.se/agda/pmwiki.php?n=ReferenceManual.Modules
http://wiki.portal.chalmers.se/agda/pmwiki.php?n=ReferenceManual.Records
(I
* Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com [2012-01-17 09:44:22+]
On 17/01/2012 09:30, Roman Cheplyaka wrote:
* Simon Marlowmarlo...@gmail.com [2012-01-03 11:00:58+]
I'd be interested in hearing feedback, particularly if you find a
case where costs are attributed somewhere that you didn't
Great! This will greatly reduce the boilerplate in the constraints package.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:15 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com wrote:
| /tmp/Test.hs:4:1:
| The multi-parameter class `C' cannot have generic methods
| In the class declaration
I broke out the dot operator section of the proposal to its own page since
it is actually fairly independent of the different proposals.
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Records/DotOperator
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 7:26 PM, wren ng thornton w...@freegeek.org wrote:
On 1/13/12 11:31 PM,
I posted this issue on StackOverflow today. A brief recap:
In the case when C FFI calls back a Haskell function, I have observed
sharp increase in total time when multi-threading is enabled in C code
(even when total number of function calls to Haskell remain same). In my
test, I called a
Hmm, this kind of sounds like GHC is assuming that it has control over
all of the threads, and when this assumption fails bad things happen.
(We use lightweight threads, and use the operating system threads that
map to pthreads sparingly.) I'm sure Simon Marlow could give a more accurate
