How or where can I pick up the testsuite for this new version? I want to
test my own builds.
Cheers Christian
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
John Meacham wrote:
I believe it is because a stack cannot be garbage collected, and must be
traversed as roots for every garbage collection. I don't think there are
any issues with a huge stack per se, but it does not play nice with
garbage collection so may hurt your performance and memory
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 02:48:13PM +0200, Christian Maeder wrote:
How or where can I pick up the testsuite for this new version? I want to
test my own builds.
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/6.6.1/ghc-testsuite-6.6.1.tar.gz
___
Glasgow-haskell-users
Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Failing because the stack has
grown beyond some arbitrary (and typically small) size seems
bad to me.
Just FYI, nhc98 has a single memory area in which the stack and heap
grow towards each other. Memory exhaustion only happens when the stack
and heap meet
Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Just FYI, nhc98 has a single memory area in which the stack and heap
grow towards each other. Memory exhaustion only happens when the stack
and heap meet in the middle and GC fails to reclaim any space.
However, it can only do this because it is single-threaded. As soon
Hi
I am trying to use GHC as a library (see
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/GHC/As_a_library ). I want to get all the
output from an interactive session and put in a GUI. This
http://haskell.org/sitewiki/images/5/51/Interactive.hs seemed to be a
nice starting point.
However, the result of:
I believe that the trick is to wrap your stmt in a IO handler that
captures stdout and returns it together with the value of your stmt.
That is, something with a type:
wrapStmt :: IO a - IO (a,String)
It should be easy to implement wrapStmt using System.Posix.Process.
Then you just define
Mads
On 04/05/2007, at 19:19, Mads Lindstrøm wrote:
Hi Pepe
I would have liked something cross-platform.
Take a look at the unix-compat[1] package by Bjorn Bringert, although
it looks like it won't help you. Maybe it can be extended.
Also, if stmt contains an error, wrapStmt will not
Hello,
The GHC users guide says overloading is death to performance if
left to linger in an inner loop and one thing I noticed while
playing about with the AVL lib was that using a HOF and passing
the (overloaded) compare function as an explicit argument at the
start seemed to give noticable a
I untar'd the 20070404 head and added its bin/i386-unknown-cygwin32 to my
PATH. When I run ghci, I get
: Can't find package.conf as
c:\ghc\GHC-67~2.200\bin\I386\driver\package.conf.inplace
Suggestions? Thanks, - Conal
On 5/2/07, Claus Reinke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the
Hi Adrian
The GHC users guide says overloading is death to performance if
left to linger in an inner loop and one thing I noticed while
playing about with the AVL lib was that using a HOF and passing
the (overloaded) compare function as an explicit argument at the
start seemed to give noticable
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 19:28 +0100, Adrian Hey wrote:
Hello,
The GHC users guide says overloading is death to performance if
left to linger in an inner loop and one thing I noticed while
playing about with the AVL lib was that using a HOF and passing
the (overloaded) compare function as an
Neil Mitchell wrote:
Hi Adrian
The GHC users guide says overloading is death to performance if
left to linger in an inner loop and one thing I noticed while
playing about with the AVL lib was that using a HOF and passing
the (overloaded) compare function as an explicit argument at the
start
Duncan Coutts wrote:
One might hope that in this case we could hoist the extraction of the
dictionary members outside the inner loop.
This possibility had crossed my mind too. If HOFs really are faster
(for whatever reason) then it should be possible for a compiler to
do this automatically.
Adrian Hey wrote:
Duncan Coutts wrote:
One might hope that in this case we could hoist the extraction of the
dictionary members outside the inner loop.
This possibility had crossed my mind too. If HOFs really are faster
(for whatever reason) then it should be possible for a
Does anyone know what became of Dictionary-free Overloading by Partial
Evaluation http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/%7Empj/pubs/pepm94.html? Is it
impractical for some reason?
On 5/4/07, Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
The GHC users guide says overloading is death to performance if
left to
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 09:02:03PM +0100, Neil Mitchell wrote:
Hi Adrian
The GHC users guide says overloading is death to performance if
left to linger in an inner loop and one thing I noticed while
playing about with the AVL lib was that using a HOF and passing
the (overloaded) compare
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 03:07:41PM -0700, Conal Elliott wrote:
Does anyone know what became of Dictionary-free Overloading by Partial
Evaluation http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/%7Empj/pubs/pepm94.html? Is it
impractical for some reason?
jhc also uses a dictionary free approach, doing a case directly
Cool. You know which types to consider because jhc is a whole-program
compiler?
Given the whole program, why not monomorphize, and inline away all of the
dictionaries?
- Conal
On 5/4/07, John Meacham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 03:07:41PM -0700, Conal Elliott wrote:
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 05:06:10PM -0700, Conal Elliott wrote:
Cool. You know which types to consider because jhc is a whole-program
compiler?
Yes. though, i have since redone the back end so there is no technical
reason for it to be whole program any more, you can just benefit from
more
Stefan O'Rear:
Data.Sequence doesn't use overloading
Data.Sequence uses overloading for subtree size annotations. The
structural recursion seems to make it quite awkward to express size
annotations without overloading.
___
Glasgow-haskell-users
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:29:54AM +1000, Matthew Brecknell wrote:
Stefan O'Rear:
Data.Sequence doesn't use overloading
Data.Sequence uses overloading for subtree size annotations. The
structural recursion seems to make it quite awkward to express size
annotations without overloading.
Ah
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 17:06 -0700, Conal Elliott wrote:
Cool. You know which types to consider because jhc is a whole-program
compiler?
Given the whole program, why not monomorphize, and inline away all of
the dictionaries?
That's what Felix does: typeclasses, no dictionaries:
whole
23 matches
Mail list logo
