On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, John Meacham wrote: > This seems to be contrary to how i thought haskell was implemented in > ghc (and probably other systems). I was under the impression that thunks > in ghc were opaque except for the code address at the begining of them. > in order to evaluate something you just jump to the address stored in > it. > > so i guess my question is, when seq'ing a function, how does one keep > it from trying to pull an argument off the stack (and evaluating it if > the function is strict)? are there multiple entry points for thunks, one > which means 'evaluate to WHNF' and another which actually returns the > result?
What difference is there between "evaluate to WHNF" and "return a result"? > if so, how is this information passed to polymorphic functions which > call seq. it seems that you would have to do something different for > abstractions and boxed values.. > John -- Dean _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
