Hi all, On Saturday 23 May 2009 04:56:02 Trent W. Buck wrote: > Eric Kow <[email protected]> writes: > > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:17:56 -0700, Jason Dagit wrote: > >> I can't manage time for another review right now. So please use your > >> best judgment without my further input :) Short answer: Sure if you > >> think so. > > > > I'm afraid I'm going to have to just apply this without review. Our > > Review Team seems to be a bit stretched right now (and I personally have > > to do a bit of catching up at work). Need more reviewers! > > I did this: > > ghc --make Setup > ./Setup configure -ftest\ tests > ./Setup build > dist/build/unit/unit -j4 > > The output from unit is totally garbled, because multiple > threads/processes are writing to stdout at the same time.
That's an unfortunate thing but there's little I can do about it. QuickCheck inherenly does console I/O and console I/O gets interleaved if done by multiple Haskell threads at the same time. > AFAICT this makes it impossible to see which unit tests are failing AND > it makes the unit tests run far more slowly -- perhaps because most of > my CPU time is taken up trying to write the garble to stdout/stderr? This is wrong. The test below does not actually use multiple CPU threads. To create multiple CPU threads you have to pass the -N flag to the Haskell runtime system, with the number of threads. The interesting thing to time is "dist/build/unit/unit -j4 +RTS -N4". I suppose the timing difference you see comes from the differences in the QuickCheck data and/or context switch overhead. To tell what tests failed, look at the summary that you get after all tests have finished. Regards, Reinier
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
