Hi lists,
(I hope my cross-posting is okay, but somehow this post seems to apply to
all of you, so here goes...)
I've recently noticed that folks at GHC HQ are working on a way to resolve
the problem of importing two modules with the same name from different
packages. There is a proposal[1] on
Hi List,
I'm running GHC and GCC head-to-head on the task of adding a bunch of
long IOUArray-Vectors really fast. My machine is a Linux-ppc PowerBook
and gets a runtime for the GHC-compiled binary that's about 10x as long
as for GCC. Simon M. tells me this should be much better. Here are the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 13. June 2002 03:12, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty wrote:
Sven Moritz Hallberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
On Wednesday 12. June 2002 10:12, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty wrote:
Knowing the GHC developers for quite a while (and having had
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 12. June 2002 13:00, you wrote:
Sven Moritz Hallberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I see the people being very nice. But there is the question whether MS
would draw them away from GHC if it desides to go full-scale with
something
fulfilled.
Sven Moritz Hallberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Put short, I'd like GHC to stay free. I'd like
the GHC source to remain available, and the developers to remain
reachable,
touchable. Basically I want the GHC development process to work in the
open
same way as it does now
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
OK, here it is. The GHC ebuild for Gentoo Linux has been incorporated in the
official package tree (search http://www.gentoo.org/index-packages.html)!
This means that it is available to anyone running Gentoo, so you can now
safely claim to run on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 11. June 2002 19:58, Sigbjorn Finne wrote:
Sven Moritz Hallberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
...
2) I read a comment somewhere (in some script or so) saying something
along
the lines of once we are cross-compiling
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 11. June 2002 21:49, Wolfgang Thaller wrote:
I'm being provocative, I know. I'm not trying to insult though, just to
encourage a creative discussion.
Me too. But I've never seen a flame war on any haskell list, so I trust
that no
On Saturday 01. June 2002 12:43, Sven Panne wrote:
Alastair Reid wrote:
Any time you take two large C programs/libraries and try to merge
them, you're likely to run into preprocessor (or compiler) related
errors like those you describe. [...]
Sad, but very true! And GHC's headers are
On Friday 31. May 2002 22:47, Hal Daume III wrote:
[...]
/nfs/isd/hdaume/download/ATLAS/include/cblas.h:591: parse error before
numeric constant
if I look at cblas.h, line 444 is the last line of this definition:
void cblas_sgemm(const enum CBLAS_ORDER Order, const enum CBLAS_TRANSPOSE
On Friday 31. May 2002 23:15, Hal Daume III wrote:
Well, I'm not sure exactly how to do this -- i can dump hspp and hc files
from the haskell source, but I don't think from the h. *HOWEVER*, i
modified cblas.h on line 444 because of your guess and found out that the
problem wasn't with the
On Wednesday 29. May 2002 17:07, you wrote:
With the help of the excellent new guide on porting GHC
(Thank you Simon!)
I have just created an ebuild for GHC. I thought I'd let you
know, in case
you're still working on it. I don't bootstrap GHC 5 directly
from HC files,
but GHC
there. I've submitted the
ebuild yesterday as Bug #3092 to the Gentoo Bugzilla. Feel free to comment if
you want to look at it.
Regards,
Sven Moritz Hallberg
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow
On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 05:26:45PM +0100, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Sven Moritz Hallberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
if there has ever been a working LinuxPPC port (I don't know about any)
No, there has not been a working port to LinuxPPC, as far as I can see.
But the mailing list
14 matches
Mail list logo
