On 08-Sep-1998, Emery Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I personally lean towards Haskell 98 myself, but just for
grins (and to hopefully offload this topic from the list):
=
STRAW POLL
Send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject "Straw Poll".
Results will be tabulated and announced on
John Launchbury [EMAIL PROTECTED]
asked recently about the Int performance vs Integer one.
In my experience with ghc-2.10 Int was 4-5 times faster than Integer
on the tasks with large amount of integer arithmetic.
Some Haskell, Hugs implementors confirm that this is not an occasion.
MISC'99
Workshop on Applications of Interval Analysis to Systems and Control
with special emphasis on recent advances in Modal Interval Analysis
February 24-26, 1999, Universitat de Girona, Girona, Spain
Dear colleague,
Remember that the deadline for full paper submissions is SEPTEMBER 30,
Standard Haskell is supposed to be a conservative bugfix of 1.4,
IMHO, the use of Int is a BUG, and we should fix it in Standard Haskell,
for all of the reasons that Jon mentions.
Haven't we had this discussion (umpteen times) before?? I thought that
we had already agreed to make this change
On 10 Sep, Will Partain wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As far as I know, none of the existing implementations
takes the speed of Integer seriously (ghc certainly doesn't), ...
The GHC implementation has always been a thin wrapper on top
of the GMP (GNU multi-precision arithmetic)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As far as I know, none of the existing implementations
takes the speed of Integer seriously (ghc certainly doesn't), ...
The GHC implementation has always been a thin wrapper on top
of the GMP (GNU multi-precision arithmetic) library. So,
while we may not have
