Bugs item #1019758, was opened at 2004-08-31 15:14
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by simonpj
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108032&aid=1019758&group_id=8032
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Compiler
Group: 6.2.1
>Status: Closed
>Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: SPECIALIZE pragma and polymorphic instances
Initial Comment:
Given a polymorphic specialization like
f :: (Storable a, Eq a) => T a
{-# SPECIALIZE f :: T (Ptr a) #-}
GHC does not produce the requested polymorphic
specialization, but if we use f at the ground types T
(Ptr Foo) and T (Ptr Bar), we get a specialization for
each, and these are essentially the same.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Simon Peyton Jones (simonpj)
Date: 2005-07-22 10:07
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=50165
Fixed, at last.
Simon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Simon Peyton Jones (simonpj)
Date: 2005-07-12 15:42
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=50165
Another useful background link:
http://www.haskell.org//pipermail/libraries/2005-
May/003871.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Simon Peyton Jones (simonpj)
Date: 2005-07-07 12:34
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=50165
Upping the priority. It's not trivial to do this, but it's still very
much on my radar
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Remi Turk (remit)
Date: 2005-07-06 17:28
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=26642
A few more links to messages about this:
SPJ explains (a.o. why he won't solve it before the POPL
deadline ;)
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2004-June/006874.html
SPJ hints that the patch will appear soon, or perhaps even
already exists:
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2005-May/008503.html
My own I-hadn't-seen-this-yet bugreport, explaining why it
is, ahum, Vitally Important(TM) to tackle this bug:
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-bugs/2005-March/004765.html
Simon Marlow implies this one (Priority 4) won't be solved
anytime soon.
http://haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2005-July/008738.html
Now, whether this counts as a "yell if you disagree [about
not solving priority < 5]." or as "if you know of a specific
perf problem, please submit it as a bug" I'll leave to the
ones who actually do the work :)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108032&aid=1019758&group_id=8032
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs
