I just pushed support for external repositories in ./sync-all, but didn't add async. It makes it easy to do so, however (and the patch is small and lightweight.)
José, if async is all you're missing, I can add it to the 'extra' repositories, and then it should be reasonably straightforward to add it to nofib as an extra benchmark, I think. On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Austin Seipp <ase...@pobox.com> wrote: > IMO, it's reasonable to allow this, but there's one minor sticky bit. > > async's only dependency is stm, and it's also part of the platform, so I > expect it will be relatively stable. In this case, perhaps we should just > add 'async' to the set of 'extra' libraries for ./sync-all, which can be > built with the compiler. Then, it should be easy to add tests for nofib (and > even testsuite, if people find bugs.) stm is already one of the 'extra' > libraries, and there are a few smp benchmarks that use it too, so this > doesn't really change anything in that regard. > > The main thing is that async isn't under our normal package structure, so > we'll either need to A) mirror it, or B) we need to add support for > ./sync-all to sync with an arbitrary HTTP url or something, and point it to > Simon's repository as an extra package. > > I'm in favor of 2 since then we don't have to maintain an unnecessary > mirror, and also, because it might be useful later for similar things. > > Thoughts? > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones <simo...@microsoft.com> > wrote: >> >> (devs: this thread is about adding useful new benchmarks to nofib.) >> >> >> >> Oh bother. I’d forgotten about dependencies. I don’t want to make building >> nofib depend on libraries other those in GHC anyway (bytestring, unix ok, >> asynch perhaps not). If that makes it tricky, maybe we should give up on >> the idea. >> >> >> >> S >> >> >> >> From: José Pedro Magalhães [mailto:jose.pedro.magalh...@cs.ox.ac.uk] >> Sent: 05 August 2013 08:41 >> To: Simon Peyton-Jones >> Subject: Re: lambda mining >> >> >> >> I'm not entirely sure how to do that, though. Do I just add it to the >> "real" subset? >> How about dependencies (e.g. bytestring >= 0.9, unix >= 2.5.0, async >= >> 2.0.0.0, ...) >> >> >> Cheers, >> Pedro >> >> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones <simo...@microsoft.com> >> wrote: >> >> great! Just add it :-) >> >> >> simon >> >> >> >> From: José Pedro Magalhães [mailto:j...@cs.ox.ac.uk] >> Sent: 30 July 2013 07:48 >> To: Simon Peyton-Jones >> Cc: Nicolas Wu; Wouter Swierstra; Jeroen Bransen >> Subject: Re: lambda mining >> >> >> >> Hi Simon, >> >> (CC-ing co-authors) >> >> Yes, I think it might work fine. Its running time can also be adjusted >> easily, depending on the maps >> given as input and some internal parameters. How would we go about adding >> it to nofib? >> >> >> Thanks, >> Pedro >> >> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones >> <simo...@microsoft.com> wrote: >> >> Pedro >> >> >> >> Wandering past your home page I took a look at your “lambda mining” paper. >> Would it be suitable as a nofib benchmark? Moderate size, authentic code... >> Would you be interested? >> >> >> >> Simon >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ghc-devs mailing list >> ghc-devs@haskell.org >> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >> > > > > -- > Regards, > Austin - PGP: 4096R/0x91384671 -- Regards, Austin - PGP: 4096R/0x91384671 _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
