On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 20:42 -0400, Mario Blažević wrote:
On Sat 23/05/09 2:51 PM , Duncan Coutts duncan.cou...@worc.ox.ac.uk sent:
On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 13:31 -0400, Mario Blažević wrote:
...
So the function is not strict, and I don't understand
why GHC should evaluate the arguments
I recommend using -ddump-simpl, as it produces more readable output.
Actually, I can't see any effect of that pragma in the
core files whatsoever, but it certainly has effect on
run time.
How about diffing the whole core output (and using -ddump-simpl). If
there's a performance
On Sun, 2009-05-24 at 12:48 -0400, Mario Blažević wrote:
How about diffing the whole core output (and using -ddump-simpl). If
there's a performance difference then there must be a difference in the
core code too.
I can't exactly use diff because the generated identifier names are not the
You could probably see exactly what's happening in
more detail by going through the Core output.
Thank you, this advice helped. The Core output indicates
that function `test' evaluates the arguments to
`parallelize' before it calls it. In other words, the
call to `parallelize' is optimized
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Mario Blažević mblaze...@stilo.com wrote:
Does anybody know of a pragma or another way to make a function *non-strict*
even
if it does always evaluate its argument? In other words, is there a way to
selectively disable the strictness optimization?
parallelize
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Max Rabkin max.rab...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Mario Blažević mblaze...@stilo.com wrote:
Does anybody know of a pragma or another way to make a function *non-strict*
even
if it does always evaluate its argument? In other words, is
On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 13:31 -0400, Mario Blažević wrote:
You could probably see exactly what's happening in
more detail by going through the Core output.
Thank you, this advice helped. The Core output indicates
that function `test' evaluates the arguments to
`parallelize' before it
On Sat 23/05/09 2:51 PM , Duncan Coutts duncan.cou...@worc.ox.ac.uk sent:
On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 13:31 -0400, Mario Blažević wrote:
...
So the function is not strict, and I don't understand
why GHC should evaluate the arguments before the call.
Right, it's lazy in the first and strict in
