Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
data NumOps = (Num a) = NumOps { square :: a - a, cube
:: a - a }
numOps :: NumOps
numOps = NumOps { square = \x-x*x, cube = \x-x*x*x }
f :: (Num a) = NumOps - a - a
f (NumOps { square, cube }) x = cube (square
The program below is compiled on an i386 under Linux,
and invoked:
test +RTS -K10m
braga.tex (a file of about 20K)
this gives a segmentation fault
test +RTS -K10m -H20m
braga.tex
works fine. It also works fine when compiled under Solaris on a Sun Sparc.
It would appear, therefore,
Hi,
what version of ghc did you compile your program with? Based on your
stack size setting, I'm guessing ghc-2.10 :-) Since then, List.sort
has been speeded up quite a bit (i.e., we're not using the sample
implementation in the Prelude any longer), and I'm unable to reproduce
your problem with
Hi!
I tried to install the binary distribution of GHC-2.10 on a Win95 machine
running Cygwin32. Thanks to the instructions found on your site, I've gone
pretty far: "make in-place" and the later compilation works fine for me.
I can produce and run exe-files.
The problem: "make install" doesn't
People seem to be forgetting the long-standing tradition of Algol (60),
Fortran (66, 77, 90)
...not to mention Algol W, S-algol, PS-algol and H Level FORTRAN...
If Simon worked for IBM he could call it FP/I, in the tradition of PL/I. So
why not Haskell-1, to be followed by Haskell-2, or even
Why not Haskell I?
(as the first "standard" form of the language)...
--Artie
People seem to be forgetting the long-standing tradition of Algol (60),
Fortran (66, 77, 90) and, no doubt, many other fine languages in their
use of 2-digit year qualifiers. 98/99 sounds good to me.
On Mon, 7 Sep 1998, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
* Incidentally, I'm leaning towards 'Haskell
