On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 04:06:26PM +0200, Bernd Brassel wrote: > Hi Neil, hi Don! > > Nice meeting you at ICFP by the way. > > > Can you give a specific example of what you have tried to do, and how it > > failed? > > I have attached a short synopsis of what our Curry to Haskell > conceptually does. I could explain what all the parts mean and why they > are defined this way, if it is important. On first glance it looks > as if we were doing unsafe things in the very worst way. But the > invariants within the generated code clean up things again. E.g., the > result of main does not at all depend on whether or not the program is > evaluated eagerly or lazily. > > I hope it is okay that I did not add any no-inline pragmata or something > like that. Unfortunately, I forgot all the things we have tried more > than a year ago to make optimization work.
Might I suggest, that the problem is your use of unsafePerformIO? If you use unsafePerformIO in accordance with the rules listed in the specification (which happens to be the FFI addendum), -O options will have no effect. (Not that what you are trying to do is achievable with correct use of unsafePerformIO; why do you want to do this unsafely, instead of just using 'length'? unsafePerformIO is a very slow function, remember) Stefan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
