> In 7.4 we merge the stub object file into the main object file
> automatically, so you don't have to worry about stub objects in your
> Makefiles or whatever.
Nice, this is very convenient.
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@
On 24/12/2011 06:23, Evan Laforge wrote:
I've noticed a strange behaviour with ghc's -osuf flag:
% cat>Test.hs
{-# LANGUAGE ForeignFunctionInterface #-}
module Test where
import Foreign
foreign import ccall "wrapper" c_callback :: Int -> IO (FunPtr Int)
% ghc-7.0.3
I've noticed a strange behaviour with ghc's -osuf flag:
% cat >Test.hs
{-# LANGUAGE ForeignFunctionInterface #-}
module Test where
import Foreign
foreign import ccall "wrapper" c_callback :: Int -> IO (FunPtr Int)
% ghc-7.0.3 -v -c -osuf .hs.o Test.hs
%
Hi, Antoine Latter and Daniel Fisher. Thanks your direction. My old URLs
are:
1.www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/7.0.3/ghc-7.0.3-i386.tar.bz2 for the ghc package;
and
2. hackage.haskell.org/platform/2010.2.0/haskell-platform-2010.2.0.0.tar.gz.
I'll try your instruction on my new portable when
On Wednesday 15 June 2011, 16:53:37, Antoine Latter wrote:
> Does this page help?
>
> http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_7_0_3
>
> Take care,
> Antoine
I would, however, recommend going for the new
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_7_0_4
which fixes a coupl
Does this page help?
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_7_0_3
Take care,
Antoine
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 4:08 AM, Simon Sin wrote:
> hi, GHC freaks,
> I tried to set up GHCi 7.0.3 and the latest haskell-platform on my new buntu
> 11.04 installation. I can successfully did it f
hi, GHC freaks,
I tried to set up GHCi 7.0.3 and the latest haskell-platform on my new buntu
11.04 installation. I can successfully did it for 6.10.3 by following the
instruction from one web post (Spork Code).
Then I following the URL given by another web post to 'wget' the 7.0.3.
When using dynamic linking on windows, shared libraries seem to be stored in
same folders where the packages where installed i.e each library in a
different folder. And these folders aren't visible to the system (by the
PATH variable). Is it possible to specify the folder to which the libraries
(li
On 05/05/2011 16:23, Evan Laforge wrote:
No, GHC compiles either for 32-bit or 64-bit, chosen when GHC is built. You
probably want to install the 32-bit version of GHC.
Ohh, so ghc always produces one kind, and no amount of -m flags will
change that? I see, I thought it was like gcc that just
> No, GHC compiles either for 32-bit or 64-bit, chosen when GHC is built. You
> probably want to install the 32-bit version of GHC.
Ohh, so ghc always produces one kind, and no amount of -m flags will
change that? I see, I thought it was like gcc that just took a flag.
> I'm not sure how this w
On 04/05/2011 22:38, Evan Laforge wrote:
So I just upgraded to 7, and on compiling I got:
/var/folders/++/+++c0U++6+0++4RjPqRgNE++8+c/-Tmp-/ghc88373_0/ghc88373_1.s:43:0:
suffix or operands invalid for `push'
/var/folders/++/+++c0U++6+0++4RjPqRgNE++8+c/-Tmp-/ghc88373_0/ghc88373_1.s:47:0:
So I just upgraded to 7, and on compiling I got:
/var/folders/++/+++c0U++6+0++4RjPqRgNE++8+c/-Tmp-/ghc88373_0/ghc88373_1.s:43:0:
suffix or operands invalid for `push'
/var/folders/++/+++c0U++6+0++4RjPqRgNE++8+c/-Tmp-/ghc88373_0/ghc88373_1.s:47:0:
suffix or operands invalid for `push'
... e
On 21/04/2011 12:29, Felipe Almeida Lessa wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
Right, it could be related to this. However this change was made to
eliminate some causes of NaNs, see:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4914
So I'm very depressed if it managed to
skell-users-boun...@haskell.org
[mailto:glasgow-haskell-users-
| boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Bjorn Buckwalter
| Sent: 22 April 2011 16:19
| To: GHC Users
| Subject: Perplexing GHC-7.0.3 behavior with hairy type-level code
(regression from
| 6.12.3??)
|
| Hello all,
|
| I am doing
I guess I have two questions. First: why would 1 not compile?
Second: why are 2, 3, and 4 not equivalent? Pointers to relevant
documentation welcome.
I broke my GHC-6.12.3 installation when upgrading to the latest HP
with GHC-7.0.3 so I cannot test 2, 3, and 4 but I know that 1 DID
compile on
On Thursday 21 April 2011 13:08:22, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 20/04/2011 18:28, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 05:02:50PM +0200, Daniel Fischer wrote:
> >> So, is it possible that some change in ghc-7.0.3 vs. the previous
> >> versions
> >
> >
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Daniel Fischer
wrote:
> On Thursday 21 April 2011 17:18:47, Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
>> I tried "ghc --make -fforce-recomp simpleTest.hs" with -O0 and -O1 and
>> -O2 on OS X with 64-bit ghc-7.0.3
>>
>> All versions ran without
On Thursday 21 April 2011 17:18:47, Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
> I tried "ghc --make -fforce-recomp simpleTest.hs" with -O0 and -O1 and
> -O2 on OS X with 64-bit ghc-7.0.3
>
> All versions ran without printing errors.
I seem to recall that GHC produces sse2 code on x86_64. I
I tried "ghc --make -fforce-recomp simpleTest.hs" with -O0 and -O1 and -O2 on OS
X with 64-bit ghc-7.0.3
All versions ran without printing errors.
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.o
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
> Right, it could be related to this. However this change was made to
> eliminate some causes of NaNs, see:
>
> http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4914
>
> So I'm very depressed if it managed to introduce NaNs somehow.
>
> Could someone
On 20/04/2011 18:28, Ian Lynagh wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 05:02:50PM +0200, Daniel Fischer wrote:
So, is it possible that some change in ghc-7.0.3 vs. the previous versions
Very little changed between 7.0.2 and 7.0.3. The only thing that jumps
out to me as possibly being relevant is
On Wednesday 20 April 2011 21:55:51, Dan Doel wrote:
>
> It's not a statistics bug. I'm reproducing it here using just
> vector-algorithms.
Yep. Attached a simple testcasewhich reproduces it and uses only vector and
vector-algorithms.
>
> Fill a vector of size N with [N..1], and (intro) sort i
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Daniel Fischer
wrote:
> I'm sure it's not criterion, because after I've found that NaNs were
> introduced to the resamples vectors during sorting (check the entire
> vectors for NaNs before and aftersorting, tracing the count; before: 0,
> afterwards often quite a
ecture dependent, so I can't guarantee that you will
> > be able to reproduce it. But Bryan said on IRC yesterday that others
> > have reported similar issues with criterion output, so it may well be
> > cross-platform reproducible.
>
> Daniel, are you sure this
ut Bryan said on IRC yesterday that others have reported
> similar issues with criterion output, so it may well be cross-platform
> reproducible.
Daniel, are you sure this is down to a 7.0.2/7.0.3 difference, and not
perhaps due to just a bug in criterion itself?
Write/Swap with their
> > bounds-checked counterparts or by 'trace'ing enough of their uses,
> > the NaNs did not appear.
>
> Did you replace them in vector-algorithms or in vector itself?
>
vector-algorithms only.
> > So, is it possible that some chan
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 05:02:50PM +0200, Daniel Fischer wrote:
>
> So, is it possible that some change in ghc-7.0.3 vs. the previous versions
Very little changed between 7.0.2 and 7.0.3. The only thing that jumps
out to me as possibly being relevant is:
diff -ur 7.0.2/ghc-7.0.2/co
;ing enough of their uses, the NaNs did not
> appear.
Did you replace them in vector-algorithms or in vector itself?
> So, is it possible that some change in ghc-7.0.3 vs. the previous
> versions caused a bad interaction between ghc-optimisations and vector
> fusion resulting in ba
.0.2 (different criterion
release, the other libraries identical) or unoptimised compilation with
7.0.3 (no NaNs encountered in some 100+ testruns with varying input).
So, is it possible that some change in ghc-7.0.3 vs. the previous versions
caused a bad interaction between ghc-optimisations an
On 3/31/11 4:30 AM, wren ng thornton wrote:
On 3/30/11 4:44 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 30/03/2011 03:12, wren ng thornton wrote:
FYI, testsuite results for OSX 10.5.8 32-bit build:
2695 total tests, which gave rise to
14978 test cases, of which
0 caused framework failures
12589 were skipped
2
On 3/30/11 4:44 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 30/03/2011 03:12, wren ng thornton wrote:
FYI, testsuite results for OSX 10.5.8 32-bit build:
2695 total tests, which gave rise to
14978 test cases, of which
0 caused framework failures
12589 were skipped
2302 expected passes
74 expected failures
0 un
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:12:15PM -0400, wren ng thornton wrote:
>
> 2695 total tests, which gave rise to
>14978 test cases, of which
>0 caused framework failures
>12589 were skipped
>
> 2302 expected passes
> 74 expected failures
>0 unexpected passes
>
On 30/03/2011 03:12, wren ng thornton wrote:
On 3/28/11 10:33 PM, Jens Petersen wrote:
FYI testsuite results:
[...]
8 unexpected failures on x86:
DoParamM(normal)
T3064(normal)
T3330a(normal)
T3738(normal)
T4316(ghci)
T4801(normal)
break024(ghci)
space_leak_001(normal)
FYI, testsuite results f
On 3/28/11 10:33 PM, Jens Petersen wrote:
FYI testsuite results:
[...]
8 unexpected failures on x86:
DoParamM(normal)
T3064(normal)
T3330a(normal)
T3738(normal)
T4316(ghci)
T4801(normal)
break024(ghci)
space_leak_001(normal)
FYI, testsuite results for OSX 10.5.8
On 29 March 2011 11:33, Jens Petersen wrote:
> I made a test build for F16 development:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2955509
Note since there are a lot of subpackages now, they can be downloaded
with a client like lftp from
http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/scratch/peterse
I made a test build for F16 development:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2955509
We'll probably move Fedora rawhide to 7.0.3 before too long.
Jens
FYI testsuite results:
59 unexpected failures on x86-64:
2592(profc)
3586(normal)
4038(normal)
Cpr001
GOOD. This fixes my OS X Xcode4 problem :-)
Is it in planning a new release of Haskell platform also?
Luca.
On Mar 27, 2011, at 9:13 PM, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>
> =
>The (Interactive) Glasgow Haskell Compiler -- vers
=
The (Interactive) Glasgow Haskell Compiler -- version 7.0.3
=
The GHC Team is pleased to announce a new patchlevel release of GHC.
This release contains a handful
Waiting for the fixed 7.0.3, is there some workaround to make available the
compilation on MacOS X with Xcode4 using HP 2011.2.0.0?
Thanks.
Luca.
Luca
On Mar 17, 2011, at 3:30 PM, Aaron Culich wrote:
> Byron- The the latest available version is of OpenGL is 2.4.0.1 so do a cabal
> upd
+, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Due to a number of issues in the 7.0.2 release, we plan to put out a
> > 7.0.3 release before finally retiring the 7.0 branch.
> >
> > We intend to fix:
> >
> > * Doc install location on Windows
> >
On 15 March 2011 18:04, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> We want to keep the changes in this release to a minimum, to minimise
> the chance of regressions, but if you think we've missed any critical
> issues please let us know.
Absolutely not critical but it would be nice if you could merge my patch in:
http
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 02:46:37PM -0700, David Terei wrote:
>
> Could you merge my fix for this:
>
> http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4995
>
> So patch is:
>
> Wed Mar 9 13:53:46 PST 2011 David Terei
> * LLVM: Fix #4995, llvm mangler broken for large compiles
>
> Its a pretty s
,
David
On 15 March 2011 10:04, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Due to a number of issues in the 7.0.2 release, we plan to put out a
> 7.0.3 release before finally retiring the 7.0 branch.
>
> We intend to fix:
>
> * Doc install location on Windows
> * Doc build
, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Due to a number of issues in the 7.0.2 release, we plan to put out a
> 7.0.3 release before finally retiring the 7.0 branch.
>
> We intend to fix:
>
> * Doc install location on Windows
> * Doc building on OS X (#4997)
> * Object
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:17:24AM -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
> ETA?
As soon as we can fix what we want to fix, and get the builds done.
Thanks
Ian
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman
ETA? We may do a minor rev of the HP at that point too, to set us up for 2011.
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Due to a number of issues in the 7.0.2 release, we plan to put out a
> 7.0.3 release before finally retiring the 7.0 branch.
>
Hi all,
Due to a number of issues in the 7.0.2 release, we plan to put out a
7.0.3 release before finally retiring the 7.0 branch.
We intend to fix:
* Doc install location on Windows
* Doc building on OS X (#4997)
* Object splitting on OS X (with XCode >= 3.2)
* Don't require the 10.
47 matches
Mail list logo
