Re: 6.4 snapshot installer available
Hi Sigbjorn. I wrote: I built CVS head GHC with this package and mucked around a little bit. The only problem I've come across so far is that an objectio library application I have crashes on take-off when built with this compiler (not necessarily to do with objectio of course). It does not crash with GHC 6.2.1 Woops. It turns out that I missed a blatantly obvious error message which 6.2.1 did not give: Starting program: c:\data\source\ghc\grass/./objectio/geo.exe grass/./objectio/geo.exe: main.hs:23:8-70: Irrefutable pattern failed for patter n [fileMenuID, mapMenuID, grassDBMenuID] after I shortened a list of ids. Luckily this afternoon I took delivery of a pair of reading glasses which will hopefully help me to avoid such errors in future. Thumbs up for that installer. Cheers Mike Thomas. ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
[ ghc-Feature Requests-1155875 ] Arbitrary function sections
Feature Requests item #1155875, was opened at 2005-03-03 16:36 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=358032aid=1155875group_id=8032 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Priority: 5 Submitted By: Dinko Tenev (a0s) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Arbitrary function sections Initial Comment: For operators we have the following shorthand: op :: a - b - c (`op` y) === \x - x `op` y (x `op`) === \y - x `op` y It would be nice to have a similar facility for functions, e.g.: f :: a - b - c - d - e f _ y _ t === \x z - f x y z t f x _ z _ === \y t - f x y z t f x _ z === \y - f x y z === \y t - f x y z t Because _ is currently not allowed as an identifier in contexts where this facility could possibly be in effect, it seems safe to use it to indicate omitted parameters in function application. -- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=358032aid=1155875group_id=8032 ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
RE: x86_64 port
On 02 March 2005 14:15, John Goerzen wrote: Kip Macy kip.macy at gmail.com writes: I've followed the instructions to the letter. Debian has had a working amd64 package of ghc for some time now. It is built out of the standard source base for it. You can find that at: http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/ghc6 You'll want to grab the orig.tar.gz and the diff.gz files. If you want to grab an amd64 .deb to try, go to: http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/pool/unstable/main/amd64/g/ ghc6/ Even if you're not running Debian, there are tools available to convert a .deb to a RPM or tgz package. Or, you can easily unpack a deb using only ar(1) and tar(1). My amd64 hardware arrived yesterday, shouldn't be too long before we have a registerised port of GHC, and possibly a native code generator... Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
RE: GHC 6.4 release candidates available
I think GHC's behaviour is right here. To use the flag settings from
the source module on the command-line would be wrong: for example, when
the module is compiled, its implementation (and therefore flag settings)
must be hidden.
Also, as Simon pointed out, there might be multiple modules in scope at
the prompt, so how do you resolve the flag settings if they're
contradictory?
In general, flag settings affect the current source file only. The flag
settings at the GHCi prompt are those given on the command line and from
:set - it's simple, no worrying about where did that option come from?
I don't want overlapping instances!.
Cheers,
Simon
On 02 March 2005 18:33, Keean Schupke wrote:
Erm, what is the module context of GHCi? I thought ghci
used the context of the loaded module:
ghci Test.hs
*Test
I though the 'Test' in the prompt indicated you were in the context of
the Test module. In which case the pragma at the top of the test
module should be in force?
Keean.
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Ah, yes. In 6.2, overlap errors were checked and reported eagerly
at the instance declaration. So instance C Int a
instance C b Bool
was rejected. Now it isn't. Instead the program is only rejected
if a constraint arises that matches two instance decls, and neither
is more specific. For example (C Int Bool)
But many constraints are fine e.g. C Int Char
However this does have the consequence that the overlapping-instance
flag must be on in the module that calls the function rather than the
one that defines the instances. It'd be better if the info
travelled with the instance decl, but it doesn't (yet). A good
feature request.
Simon
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:glasgow-haskell-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Keean Schupke
Sent: 02 March 2005 17:20
To: Simon Peyton-Jones
Cc: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
Subject: Re: GHC 6.4 release candidates available
In the past having:
{-# OPTIONS -fallow-overlapping-instances #-}
in a module was enough to get ghci to allow the overlaps.
so we do:
ghci Test.hs
now it does not work (but it did in 6.3), but:
ghci -fallow-overlapping-instances Test.hs
does... Even it Test.hs is the top level module.
Keean.
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Ralf
You have a pragma -fallow-overlapping-instances in Test.hs, and
indeed it is honoured when compiling Test.hs. But it's not taken
into account when compiling top-level expressions, or, indeed, if
you were to import Test into another module.
If you say :set -falllow-overlapping-instances it'll work fine.
Now, maybe you'd like the flag to attach permanently to the
*instance*, so that if an instance decl is compiled with
-fallow-overlapping-instances, then no complaint will ever be
issued for its overlaps, even if it is imported into a module that
doesn't have -fallow-overlapping-instances. That would make
sense, I think, but it's not implemented and never has been.
Simon
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:glasgow-haskell-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Ralf Lammel
Sent: 02 March 2005 08:45
To: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
Subject: RE: GHC 6.4 release candidates available
I think this is an old bug,
or at least I have seen it months back.
The overlapping instances directive does not make it to the
top-level. See attached sample with the offending session.
Thanks for fixing.
Ralf
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
ANNOUNCE: The GHC Survey 2005
Just ahead of the 6.4 release, we've put together a GHC user survey. The idea is to help us get a better understanding of who uses GHC, what for, what aspects of GHC they consider most valuable, and what they would most like to see improved. The survey is anonymous (if you wish), and should take about 5 minutes to complete. We will use the information to help guide what we do in future, and to help justify what to do. Have your say! We'll also be publishing lots of cool stats once we have enough responses. Here's the link: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/survey/start.cgi Many thanks to Tomasz Zielonka for putting together the survey, which is implemented using WASH on GHC (of course). Simon M, on behalf of the GHC Team ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: x86_64 port
Simon Marlow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: My amd64 hardware arrived yesterday, shouldn't be too long before we have a registerised port of GHC, and possibly a native code generator... :- As soon as you have some pre-alpha release, I'm ready to test ;) Sincerely, Gour -- Registered Linux User | #278493 GPG Public Key | 8C44EDCD ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: GHC 6.4 release candidates available
There can only be one top level module in ghci (there can only be one module name before the '' prompt - that modules options should be in effect. The whole point of putting options at the top of the source file is so that the user/compiler of the code does not need to know which specific options are required. If the code specifies overlapping instances, I don't expext to have to specify it on the command line as well. Simon Marlow wrote: I think GHC's behaviour is right here. To use the flag settings from the source module on the command-line would be wrong: for example, when the module is compiled, its implementation (and therefore flag settings) must be hidden. Requiring options on the command line exposes the implementation I do not expect the GHCi user to be required to know which flags to apply to get my code to run. Also, as Simon pointed out, there might be multiple modules in scope at the prompt, so how do you resolve the flag settings if they're contradictory? Only the flags from the top level (the one named before the prompt) would be in scope. If I type: ghci Test.hs Then I would expect the options pragma in Test.hs to be in effect. In general, flag settings affect the current source file only. The flag settings at the GHCi prompt are those given on the command line and from :set - it's simple, no worrying about where did that option come from? I don't want overlapping instances!. I really don't like GHCi users needing to know what flags they must use to get code to work. There must be some way of code asserting top level options. If the options pragma cannot be used for this purpose I suggest there should be another way for code to assert top level options of ghci... this method should be in the source file so that extra options files are not required... Keean. ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
RE: GHC 6.4 release candidates available
On 04 March 2005 12:58, Keean Schupke wrote: There can only be one top level module in ghci (there can only be one module name before the '' prompt - that modules options should be in effect. No, you can have multiple top-level module scopes in effect. See the GHCi documentation. Simon Marlow wrote: I think GHC's behaviour is right here. To use the flag settings from the source module on the command-line would be wrong: for example, when the module is compiled, its implementation (and therefore flag settings) must be hidden. Requiring options on the command line exposes the implementation I do not expect the GHCi user to be required to know which flags to apply to get my code to run. Why not? You're providing a library which exports some instances. If overlapping instance resolution is required to resolve overloading in code that uses the library, I want to know about it, and I don't want the compiler to turn on overlapping instance resolution behind my back. Importing a library should *not* affect how the code that imports it is compiled, except in the ways you expect (bringing names and instances into scope). If you could specify overlapping on a per-instance basis, then that would be a way around the problem. Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: x86_64 port
My amd64 hardware arrived yesterday, shouldn't be too long before we have a registerised port of GHC, and possibly a native code generator... That would be great! I just assembled an amd64 box and I am mssing ghci badly. Let me know if I can be of any help (testing ..). Cheers, Ralf ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
RE: GHC 6.4 release candidates available (breakage on x86-64)
On 02 March 2005 05:08, Brian Strand wrote: Donald Bruce Stewart wrote: bstrand: Donald Bruce Stewart wrote: bstrand: Simon Marlow wrote: Just to let you know, there are a number of open bug reports for GHC on the x86_64 platform, which seem to indicate some kind of occasional memory/GC problem. I'm probably not going to be able to track this down until after the 6.4 release, but we'll put out a patch as soon as we have one. Here's an error building ghc-6.4.20050224ghc-6.4.20050224 via Anders' Debian x86-64 ghc, although it doesn't look like a memory/GC problem to my untrained eye: ==fptools== make boot - --no-print-directory -r; in /home/bstrand/src/ghc-6.4.20050224/ghc/lib/compat ../../../glafp-utils/mkdependC/mkdependC -f .depend -I../../includes -- -O-- cbits/directory.c cbits/rawSystem.c /usr/bin/ghc -M -optdep-f -optdep.depend -osuf o-H16m -O -H64m -O -I. -Rghc-timing -I../../../libraries -fglasgow-exts -no-recomp Compat/Directory.hs Compat/RawSystem.hs Distribution/Compat/ReadP.hs Distribution/Extension.hs Distribution/GetOpt.hs Distribution/InstalledPackageInfo.hs Distribution/License.hs Distribution/Package.hs Distribution/ParseUtils.hs Distribution/Setup.hs Distribution/Version.hs System/Directory/Internals.hs ghc: 15653112 bytes, 5 GCs, 73168/73168 avg/max bytes residency (1 samples), 63M in use, 0.00 INIT (0.00 elapsed), 0.12 MUT (5.14 elapsed), 0.03 GC (0.57 elapsed) :ghc make all rm -f System/Directory/Internals.o; if [ ! -d System/Directory/Internals_split ]; then mkdir System/Directory/Internals_split; else /usr/bin/find System/Directory/Internals_split -name '*.o' -print | xargs rm -f __rm_food; fi; /usr/bin/ghc -H16m -O -H64m -O -I. -Rghc-timing -I../../../libraries -fglasgow-exts -no-recomp -split-objs-c System/Directory/Internals.hs-o System/Directory/Internals.o -ohi System/Directory/Internals.hi warning: don't know how to split object files on this architecture ghc: 76094368 bytes, 11 GCs, 2187736/4575048 avg/max bytes residency (3 samples), 66M in use, 0.00 INIT (0.00 elapsed), 0.87 MUT (13.77 elapsed), 0.14 GC (1.40 elapsed) :ghc ( cd System/Directory/Internals_split; rm -f ld.script; touch ld.script; echo INPUT( *.o ) ld.script; /usr/bin/ld -r -x -o ../Internals.old.script; ); /usr/bin/ld:ld.script: file format not recognized; treating as linker script /usr/bin/ld:ld.script:1: syntax error make[4]: *** [System/Directory/Internals.o] Error 1 make[3]: *** [boot] Error 2 make[2]: *** [boot] Error 1 make[1]: *** [boot] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/bstrand/src/ghc-6.4.20050224/ghc' make: *** [build] Error 1 Can you try building with SplitObjs=NO ? Wolfgang, Ryan - that looks like a splitter problem, no? (The splitter is more of a dark art than the evil mangler, I propose we name it the diabolical splitter from now on.) -- Don Using SplitObjs=NO gives out many warnings then finally dies with: ../../ghc/compiler/ghc-inplace -optc-O -optc-Wall -optc-W -optc-Wstrict-prototypes -optc-Wmissing-prototypes -optc-Wmissing-declarations -optc-Winline -optc-Waggregate-return -optc-Wbad-function-cast -optc-I../includes -optc-I. -optc-Iparallel -optc-DCOMPILING_RTS -optc-fomit-frame-pointer -H16m -O -H64m -O -O2 -static -I. -#include Prelude.h -#include Rts.h -#include RtsFlags.h -#include RtsUtils.h -#include StgRun.h -#includeSchedule.h -#include Printer.h -#include Sanity.h -#include STM.h -#include Storage.h -#include SchedAPI.h -#include Timer.h -#include Itimer.h-#include ProfHeap.h -#include LdvProfile.h -#include Profiling.h -#include Apply.h -fvia-C -dcmm-lint -c StgCRun.c -o StgCRun.o In file included from ../includes/Stg.h:149, from StgCRun.c:67: ../includes/Regs.h:213: warning: call-clobbered register used for global register variable ../includes/Regs.h:342: warning: call-clobbered register used for global register variable /tmp/ghc13908.s: Assembler messages: /tmp/ghc13908.s:20: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `jmp' make[2]: *** [StgCRun.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [all] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/bstrand/src/ghc-6.4.20050224/ghc' make: *** [build] Error 1 Are you building unregisterised? Those messages about global register variables (I think) imply that you are not -- and we haven't yet got x86_64 (terrible name, I much prefer amd64) registerised. Looks like you might even have found the point where registerisation breaks. Try building unregisterised: GhcUnregisterised=YES just as the .hc bootstrap compiler was built. -- Don Well, I don't know much about how the bootstrap compiler was built (I just downloaded it from http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/pool/unstable/main/amd64/g/ ghc6/), but building with GhcUnregisterised=YES and SplitObjs=NO died with: ==fptools== make all -wr; in
Re: x86_64 port
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 09:38:47AM -, Simon Marlow wrote: Even if you're not running Debian, there are tools available to convert a .deb to a RPM or tgz package. Or, you can easily unpack a deb using only ar(1) and tar(1). My amd64 hardware arrived yesterday, shouldn't be too long before we have a registerised port of GHC, and possibly a native code generator... burns excellent /burns ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: GHC 6.4 release candidates available
Simon Marlow wrote: On 04 March 2005 12:58, Keean Schupke wrote: There can only be one top level module in ghci (there can only be one module name before the '' prompt - that modules options should be in effect. No, you can have multiple top-level module scopes in effect. See the GHCi documentation. But I can also have just one top level module ... Simon Marlow wrote: I think GHC's behaviour is right here. To use the flag settings from the source module on the command-line would be wrong: for example, when the module is compiled, its implementation (and therefore flag settings) must be hidden. Requiring options on the command line exposes the implementation I do not expect the GHCi user to be required to know which flags to apply to get my code to run. Why not? You're providing a library which exports some instances. If overlapping instance resolution is required to resolve overloading in code that uses the library, I want to know about it, and I don't want the compiler to turn on overlapping instance resolution behind my back. But what if it is an application and not a library... you definitely do not wantr to have to explain in the user manual that ghci needs to be started with: ghci -fglasgow-exts -fallow-overlapping-instances ... Further more it is the _importing_ module that needs to have overlapping instances defined, therefore there is absolutely no chance of them being turned on behind your back. Importing a library should *not* affect how the code that imports it is compiled, except in the ways you expect (bringing names and instances into scope). It would not... All I am saying is if the top level module in GHCi (the one named in the prompt) has OPTIONS pagmas these should be in effect. If you could specify overlapping on a per-instance basis, then that would be a way around the problem. This worked in all GHCi before 6.4 - so something has broken the (in mu opinion) correct behavior. Was this a deliberate decision - or has something just changed without anyone realising? Keean. ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
GHC 6.4 Release Candidate Binary for Mac OS X
I've uploaded a Mac OS X installer based on the stable tree from March 2nd + the patches I committed yesterday at: http://opeongo.cas.mcmaster.ca/~wolfgang/GHC-6.4.20050302.pkg.zip This package is built with support for dynamic libraries (some human intervention was required to build it). Mac users, please start testing and send lots of feedback to me and to the list. Cheers, Wolfgang ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
RE: x86_64 port
On 04 March 2005 14:04, John Goerzen wrote: On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 09:38:47AM -, Simon Marlow wrote: Even if you're not running Debian, there are tools available to convert a .deb to a RPM or tgz package. Or, you can easily unpack a deb using only ar(1) and tar(1). My amd64 hardware arrived yesterday, shouldn't be too long before we have a registerised port of GHC, and possibly a native code generator... burns excellent /burns Don't hold your breath, I have some bad news. It seems that gcc is still generating incorrect code for register variables (or maybe it's broken again?). I don't know if I can work around it yet. We'll see. Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: x86_64 port
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 04:57:04PM -, Simon Marlow wrote: On 04 March 2005 14:04, John Goerzen wrote: My amd64 hardware arrived yesterday, shouldn't be too long before we have a registerised port of GHC, and possibly a native code generator... burns excellent /burns Don't hold your breath, I have some bad news. It seems that gcc is still generating incorrect code for register variables (or maybe it's broken again?). Which version of gcc? ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: GHC 6.4 Release Candidate Binary for Mac OS X
Wolfgang Thaller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've uploaded a Mac OS X installer based on the stable tree from March 2nd + the patches I committed yesterday at: http://opeongo.cas.mcmaster.ca/~wolfgang/GHC-6.4.20050302.pkg.zip $ ghc --version dyld: /usr/local/lib/ghc-6.4/ghc-6.4 can't open library: /Users/wolfgang/GHC/stable-build/libraries/readline/libHSreadline_dyn.dylib (No such file or directory, errno = 2) Trace/BPT trap Regards, Malcolm ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
RE: x86_64 port
On 04 March 2005 16:59, John Goerzen wrote: On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 04:57:04PM -, Simon Marlow wrote: On 04 March 2005 14:04, John Goerzen wrote: My amd64 hardware arrived yesterday, shouldn't be too long before we have a registerised port of GHC, and possibly a native code generator... burns excellent /burns Don't hold your breath, I have some bad news. It seems that gcc is still generating incorrect code for register variables (or maybe it's broken again?). Which version of gcc? gcc (GCC) 3.4.2 20041017 (Red Hat 3.4.2-6.fc3) ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: x86_64 port
On 4-Mar-05, at 11:57 AM, Simon Marlow wrote: Don't hold your breath, I have some bad news. It seems that gcc is still generating incorrect code for register variables (or maybe it's broken again?). So maybe this will be the first NCG-only port of GHC :-). Death to the Mangler! Cheers, Wolfgang ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: GHC 6.4 release candidates available
Further to my last point, what if the top level module is Main... ghci Main.hs and that includes a main function, and pragmas, so that main runs when ghci is finished loading (automatically). If main runs automatically then the context of ghci must be the Main module, so why would the options pragmas not be in effect? for example: ghc -o test Main.hs needs no flags and I can then run test with no flags (./test). But: ghci Main.hs Now all of a sudden you are telling me I need to provide command line flags to get it to run (in the interpreter) but I do not need to if I use the compiler... (remember this worked fine in 6.3 and 6.3 included the new lazy instance overlap detection) This seems very inconsistant to me... I really like the ability to put any flags code might need into the source using the OPTIONS pragmas... but it seems to undermine the usefulness of this if ghci ignores the flags. Keean ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: 6.4 snapshot installer available
New installer available that includes all STABLE changes up until 20:00 UTC today: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/stable/dist/ghc-6-4-20050304.msi ( md5.sig: 022bfcaae335b718bdc59014d58b39a0 ) --sigbjorn - Original Message - From: Sigbjorn Finne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: GHC users glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 15:37 Subject: 6.4 snapshot installer available http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/stable/dist/ghc-6-4-20050301.msi (md5.sig: 0f3be1a0c211194415b2cb8ee579f6e1 ; size: 46M) the only known omission from the bits intended to be included in the release proper is the PDF version of the user's guide. --sigbjorn ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
