Yes, they do
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joel
| Reymont
| Sent: 14 December 2005 20:39
| To: Tomasz Zielonka
| Cc: Simon Marlow; Haskell-Cafe Cafe
| Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Top-level TVars
|
|
| On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 02:17
On 14 December 2005 20:39, Joel Reymont wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 02:17:17PM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
Suppose you create two top-level IORefs with the same type, like
this:
var1 = unsafePerformIO $ newIORef 0
var2 = unsafePerformIO $ newIORef 0
GHC's CSE optimisation will
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joel
| Reymont
| Sent: 13 December 2005 18:08
| To: Haskell-Cafe Cafe
| Subject: [Haskell-cafe] Top-level TVars
|
| Can this be done now or is this a GHC 6.5 feature?
|
| My combination of unsafePerformIO with atomically $ newTVar does not
| seem to be working
On 13 December 2005 18:34, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 06:08:23PM +, Joel Reymont wrote:
Can this be done now or is this a GHC 6.5 feature?
My combination of unsafePerformIO with atomically $ newTVar does not
seem to be working.
Here is an example how you can
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 09:51:16AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
Here is an example how you can initialize a top-level STM variable.
http://www.uncurry.com/repos/TimeVar/TimeVar.hs
It just forks a new thread inside unsafePerformIO, it runs
atomically in it and passes the result through
On 14 December 2005 09:57, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 09:51:16AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
Here is an example how you can initialize a top-level STM variable.
http://www.uncurry.com/repos/TimeVar/TimeVar.hs
It just forks a new thread inside unsafePerformIO, it runs
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 10:03:42AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
Well sure, but it's only a temporary problem. And you also have to tell
them to use {-# NOINLINE #-} and -fno-cse :-)
-fno-cse is also neccesary? Oops, I didn't know that. Can I simply
place it in {-# OPTIONS -fno-cse #-} ?
Best
I'm a bit lost in the discussion. Why do I need -fno-cse and how do I
seq at the top-level?
On Dec 14, 2005, at 10:05 AM, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 10:03:42AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
Well sure, but it's only a temporary problem. And you also have
to tell
them to
On 14 December 2005 10:11, Joel Reymont wrote:
I'm a bit lost in the discussion. Why do I need -fno-cse and how do I
seq at the top-level?
On Dec 14, 2005, at 10:05 AM, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 10:03:42AM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
Well sure, but it's only a
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 02:17:17PM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
Suppose you create two top-level IORefs with the same type, like this:
var1 = unsafePerformIO $ newIORef 0
var2 = unsafePerformIO $ newIORef 0
GHC's CSE optimisation will common these up - after all, it's the same
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 02:17:17PM -, Simon Marlow wrote:
Suppose you create two top-level IORefs with the same type, like
this:
var1 = unsafePerformIO $ newIORef 0
var2 = unsafePerformIO $ newIORef 0
GHC's CSE optimisation will common these up - after all, it's the
same
Can this be done now or is this a GHC 6.5 feature?
My combination of unsafePerformIO with atomically $ newTVar does not
seem to be working.
Thanks, Joel
P.S. What is the ETA for 6.5?
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 10:50:13AM -, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
It turns out to be
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 06:08:23PM +, Joel Reymont wrote:
Can this be done now or is this a GHC 6.5 feature?
My combination of unsafePerformIO with atomically $ newTVar does not
seem to be working.
Here is an example how you can initialize a top-level STM variable.
13 matches
Mail list logo
