Re: strictness of interpreted haskell implementations

2009-05-18 Thread Neil Mitchell
Hi       data S = S { a :: Int, b :: ! Int }       Main a (S { a = 0, b = 1 })       0       Main a (S { a = 0, b = undefined })       0 Ho hum.  Is this a known difference? I've submitted a bug: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/hugs/ticket/92 As an ex teaching assistant my

Re[2]: strictness of interpreted haskell implementations

2009-05-18 Thread Bulat Ziganshin
Hello Neil, Monday, May 18, 2009, 8:14:56 PM, you wrote: As an ex teaching assistant my recommendation is Use ghci!. I helped to teach using WinHugs, which was quite nice. Auto reload cuts out one very frequent source of problems. i think we should fill a ticket against it. auto-save in

Re: strictness of interpreted haskell implementations

2009-05-07 Thread Duncan Coutts
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 00:43 +0100, Geraint Jones wrote: Sorry to revive a year-old thread, but... On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 at 20:17:53 +0100 Duncan Coutts wrote: On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 09:08 -0700, Don Stewart wrote: Geraint.Jones: Are there well-known differences in the implementations of

Re: strictness of interpreted haskell implementations

2009-05-04 Thread Geraint Jones
Sorry to revive a year-old thread, but... On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 at 20:17:53 +0100 Duncan Coutts wrote: On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 09:08 -0700, Don Stewart wrote: Geraint.Jones: Are there well-known differences in the implementations of Haskell in ghci and hugs? I've got some moderately

strictness of interpreted haskell implementations

2008-04-25 Thread Geraint Jones
Are there well-known differences in the implementations of Haskell in ghci and hugs? I've got some moderately intricate code (simulations of pipelined processors) that behave differently - apparently because ghci Haskell is stricter than hugs Haskell, and I cannot find any obviously relevant

Re: strictness of interpreted haskell implementations

2008-04-25 Thread Don Stewart
Geraint.Jones: Are there well-known differences in the implementations of Haskell in ghci and hugs? I've got some moderately intricate code (simulations of pipelined processors) that behave differently - apparently because ghci Haskell is stricter than hugs Haskell, and I cannot find any

Re: strictness of interpreted haskell implementations

2008-04-25 Thread Duncan Coutts
On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 09:08 -0700, Don Stewart wrote: Geraint.Jones: Are there well-known differences in the implementations of Haskell in ghci and hugs? I've got some moderately intricate code (simulations of pipelined processors) that behave differently - apparently because ghci

Re: strictness of interpreted haskell implementations

2008-04-25 Thread Josef Svenningsson
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Duncan Coutts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 09:08 -0700, Don Stewart wrote: Geraint.Jones: Are there well-known differences in the implementations of Haskell in ghci and hugs? I've got some moderately intricate code (simulations