Am 28.02.2011 21:47, schrieb Ian Lynagh:
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 04:08:55PM +0100, Christian Maeder wrote:
Am 28.02.2011 13:33, schrieb Christian Maeder:
Am 20.02.2011 22:16, schrieb Ian Lynagh:
We are pleased to announce the second release candidate for GHC 7.0.2:
Am 28.02.2011 21:47, schrieb Ian Lynagh:
[...]
week (which also puts back the HP release, the 7.2.1 release, and at
this rate even the 7.4 release!).
Why are you talking about a 7.2.1 release and even 7.4? The GHC trac
does not even have descriptions for those. Instead there's a milestone
for
On 21/02/2011 01:08, Edward Z. Yang wrote:
Excerpts from Tyson Whitehead's message of Sun Feb 20 07:14:56 -0500 2011:
I believe a back trace on the actual call stack is generally considered not
that useful in a lazy language as it corresponds to the evaluation sequence,
That is, it is demand
On 22/02/2011 22:38, Tyler Pirtle wrote:
Hi there,
I'm using a system with an older version of GHC (6.8.3), and invoking
ghc-pkg against a non-existing file in -f:
$ haskell/ghc/v683/k8/lib/ghc-6.8.3/ghc-pkg.bin --global-conf
haskell/ghc/v683/k8/lib/ghc-6.8.3/package.conf -f
On 24/02/2011 13:26, José Pedro Magalhães wrote:
(Forwarding to haskell-cafe)
Hi,
I have a program that computes a matrix of Floats of m rows by n
columns. Computing each Float is relatively expensive. Each line is
completely independent of the others, so I thought I'd try some simple
SMP
Simon Marlow wrote:
For small arrays like this maybe we should have a new array type that
leaves out all the card-marking stuff too (or just use tuples, as Roman
suggested).
Would it, in theory, be possible to have an unpacked array type? That
is, could we have constructors for which the
On 01/03/2011 11:55, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
For small arrays like this maybe we should have a new array type that
leaves out all the card-marking stuff too (or just use tuples, as Roman
suggested).
Would it, in theory, be possible to have an unpacked array type? That
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 11:09, Christian Maeder wrote:
Why are you talking about a 7.2.1 release [...]?
What important achievement (apart from the tickets listed) should I expect
from a 7.2.1 release compared to 7.0.2 (or 7.0.3)?
Simon Marlow wrote:
On 01/03/2011 11:55, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
Would it, in theory, be possible to have an unpacked array type? That
is, could we have constructors for which the length of the closure is
determined dynamically at runtime?
Certainly, but the amount of effort to
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Simon Marlow marlo...@gmail.com wrote:
Ideally you'd want the heap check in the primop to be aggregated into the
calling function's heap check, and the primop should allocate directly from
the heap instead of calling out to the RTS allocate(). All this is a bit
10 matches
Mail list logo
