ahey:
> On Monday 19 Apr 2004 11:27 am, Adrian Hey wrote:
> > Perhaps I was doing something stupid.
>
> Yep, I must of been doing something stupid. I've just tried it again and I
> do get different object files. In fact inlinining seems to give me smaller
> object files (not that I'm complaining :
On Monday 19 Apr 2004 11:27 am, Adrian Hey wrote:
> Perhaps I was doing something stupid.
Yep, I must of been doing something stupid. I've just tried it again and I
do get different object files. In fact inlinining seems to give me smaller
object files (not that I'm complaining :-).
Sorry everybo
Hi,
Is there any way to make GHC dump the type checker tree in some kind of
human readable format? I'm not interested in it when it is successful,
but I'd
like to look at the search tree when type checking fails.
Is this possible?
Best Wishes,
Greg Wright
___
On Monday 19 Apr 2004 9:52 am, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> | > Does inlining work with any function definitions (including those
> | > defined locally following a where.. say), or only with top level
> | > function definitions?
>
> If you mean
>
> In GHC, if I use an {-# INLINE #-} pragma on
| > Does inlining work with any function definitions (including those
| > defined locally following a where.. say), or only with top level
| > function definitions?
If you mean
In GHC, if I use an {-# INLINE #-} pragma on a
nested function definition, should it be inlined?
then t
That's great! Well done Don!
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:glasgow-haskell-users-
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Donald Bruce Stewart
| Sent: 19 April 2004 08:04
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: amd64 seems to work
|
| Hey,
|
| OVERALL SUMMARY
Hey,
OVERALL SUMMARY for test run started at Sun Apr 18 23:53:04 MDT 2004
1040 total tests, which gave rise to
2906 test cases, of which
0 caused framework failures
339 were skipped
2459 expected passes
20 expec
