> > However, the new debugger > > in GHC must do something to get names of things, so perhaps the > > -prof hack is no longer needed? > > I believe the debugger that Robert Ennals is working on tries to infer > constructor names from the symbol table of the binary. Personally, I'd > like to see debugging info placed in a separate segment of the binary, > so it won't be loaded with the code but can be used by a debugger.
I wonder whether keeping the names of data constructors in info tables is expensive? I would have guessed not. (more debugging info such as function names and src locations is likely to be more expensive however). Anyway, would it be possible/feasible for GHC to keep names in info tables all the time, not just for profiling? At least for data-constructors? Cheers, Bernie. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
