It seems our GMP.framework is only suited for Powerpc. I'll look after
it. Thanks for your hints and sorry for the inconveniences. (Meanwhile
you could try to get the GMP.framework for intel macs from elsewhere.)
Christian
P.S. There is also a problem with the GNUreadline.framework in your home
| I remember the reason that was unsatisfactory now. The RULES only fire
| at high optimisation levels, whereas for this particular program the
| CAF/unCAF-ness of a function effects whether the program gives the
| correct answer.
That is indeed scary. Would you like to give a small example of
Hi Ian and Simon,
Ian said:
Does the boxing not get optimised out?
Is the FFI imported function exported from the module?
http://hpaste.org/1882 (replicated at the end of this message in case
the hpaste is not around forever, but clearly layout and syntax
colouring)
Thats the main branch,
Hi
http://hpaste.org/1882 (replicated at the end of this message in case
the hpaste is not around forever, but clearly layout and syntax
colouring)
For completeness, the code in question is:
Main.$wccall [NEVER Nothing] :: GHC.Prim.State# GHC.Prim.RealWorld
-
Hello,
The following happened to Johannes Waldmann as trying to run yi, which
embeds the GHC api to dynamically load code.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ yi
yi: can't load .so/.DLL for: pthread (/usr/lib/libpthread.so: invalid
ELF header)
The error doesn't happen on my system (ubuntu feisty); despite
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Could there be a flag weaker than -O that doesn't cause recompilation
any more than -O0 does -- would that provide any worthwhile
optimizations? (an intermediate speed-tradeoff option for haskell
developers.) Dependency on the details of modules
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 05:51:12PM -0400, Isaac Dupree wrote:
Could there be a flag weaker than -O that doesn't cause recompilation
any more than -O0 does -- would that provide any worthwhile
optimizations? (an intermediate speed-tradeoff option for haskell
developers.) Dependency on the
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 10:19:07AM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
Really? I'm beginning to have second thoughts about the proposed change to
negation for Haskell'. The main reason, and this isn't pointed out as well
as it should be on the wiki, is that x-1 will cease to be an infix
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 06:40:04PM +0200, Twan van Laarhoven wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
...
Really? I'm beginning to have second thoughts about the proposed change
to negation for Haskell'. The main reason, and this isn't pointed out
as well as it should be on the wiki, is that x-1 will
ghc 6.6 and 6.6.1 both go into infinite loops and eventually die with a
stackfault when trying to compile the attached file with optimizations
turned on.
--
John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈
module C.Op where
{-
Basic operations. These are chosen to be roughly equivalent to c-- operations,
but
10 matches
Mail list logo
