On 15/09/2010 03:33, Edward Z. Yang wrote:
Excerpts from Simon Marlow's message of Mon Sep 13 05:10:13 -0400 2010:
The idea of having user-definable cancellation mechanisms seems quite
sensible, given that we have so many ways to do this. However it seems
quite hard in practice: for
On 15/09/2010 03:49, Bruno MartÃnez Aguerre wrote:
To understand better whether ghc is taking advantage of my UNPACK
pragmas, I want to profile my program and sort the allocations by type.
I couldn't find an option to do this. -p is only by cost-center, and -hy
only works for live data, and I
On 14/09/2010 02:09, Thomas DuBuisson wrote:
All,
A recent SO question [1] led me to do a quick test on hard-coding RTS
options as suggested in the manual rts-hooks section [2].
Unfortunately the timing tests indicate ghc_rts_opts isn't being
used; tests with flags besides -N (ex: -H1024m) also
On 14/09/2010 20:00, Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
In the GHC I/O system, a Handle may be backed by a device (IODevice
instance) with IODeviceType = Directory
There doesn't seem to be any (at least Google search did not give
anything) code that uses this; however, what is supposed to be read
from
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:38:17AM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
Alternatively we could give it a meaning as you suggest -
newline-separated file names seems like a reasonable interpretation.
'\0'-separated sounds better.
Thanks
Ian
___
Simon,
Thanks for your reply.
On 9/15/10, Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com wrote:
The FD implementation of Handles never makes a Handle with an IODeviceType
of Directory, because openFile is specified to raise an exception when
applied to a directory.
Yes, that was the only place in the
Excerpts from Simon Marlow's message of Wed Sep 15 04:34:06 -0400 2010:
It's not clear to me when to emit the warning: the system we're
compiling on is not necessarily the one we're going to run on. This is
more often the case for us where we're building distributions, than for
other
