I've found a bug in the scheduler:
When a main thread finishes (e.g. returning from a ffi callback), the
GC might be run before it is removed from the main_threads list. If a
major collection happens, the thread will be garbage collected and the
GC barfs when it updates the pointers in the
What is the approved way of generating and installing docs?
I tried (from source)
./configure ...
make all
make install
make html
make dvi
make ps
make install-docs
The latter command fails with (as usual with a bit of German :-)
---
==fptools== make install-docs -wr;
in
What is the approved way of generating and installing docs?
I tried (from source)
./configure ...
make all
make install
make html
make dvi
make ps
make install-docs
The latter command fails with (as usual with a bit of German :-)
Do you have Haddock installed? Did the configure
| The report says The expression F {}, where F is a data constructor,
is
| legal whether or not F was declared with record syntax, provided F has
no
| strict fields: it denotes F _|_1 ... _|_n where n is the arity of F.
|
| It unclear to me why there needs to be this provision for records with
What is the approved way of generating and installing docs?
I tried (from source)
./configure ...
make all
make install
make html
make dvi
make ps
make install-docs
The latter command fails with (as usual with a bit of German :-)
Do you have Haddock installed? Did the
BTW, why did you separate Haddock from GHC? I love these vicious
circles: to build GHC with docs you need Haddock, to build Haddock
you need GHC ...
You can either use an installed Haddock, or use Haddock from the same
tree (./configure --enable-src-tree-haddock).
It's not really a cyclic
I've found a bug in the scheduler:
When a main thread finishes (e.g. returning from a ffi callback), the
GC might be run before it is removed from the main_threads list. If a
major collection happens, the thread will be garbage
collected and the
GC barfs when it updates the pointers
| The report says The expression F {}, where F is a data constructor,
is
| legal whether or not F was declared with record syntax, provided F has
no
| strict fields: it denotes F _|_1 ... _|_n where n is the arity of F.
|
| It unclear to me why there needs to be this provision for records with
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 12:34:53PM +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
I spoke too soon. Consider
data F = F Int !Int
data S = S { x::Int, y::!Int }
According to the words above
F {} is illegal
but what about this one?
S {}
I think the sentence in question (end of 3.15.2)
| I think the sentence in question (end of 3.15.2) is just a
clarification;
| the preceding 4 rules are sufficient and clear: F{}, S{} and S{x=3}
are
| all illegal because they omit a value for a strict field. That is,
it's
| correct, though not strictly necessary, nor does it cover all the
Blargh. Excellent point. I had totally forgotten that. I withdraw all
suggested changes except a cross-ref to the section you mention. Sigh.
My brain is getting soft.
Actually the rules referenced appear immediately above, so no reference is
necessary.
My original message was not
On http://www.haskell.org/ghc/
the link to the Users' Guide is missing.
Cheers Christian
GHC Features
This is a summary of GHC's main features. They are all described in more
detail in the Users' Guide.
The requested URL
/ghc/docs/latest/html/users_guide/book-users-guide.html was not found
*Foo it
ghc-5.04.1: panic! (the `impossible' happened, GHC version 5.04.1):
rdrNameModule it
Fixed, thanks.
Simon
___
Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs
The reason that this worries me is that Cygwin ld links
with libraries
from the Cygwin lib directory rather than the Mingw
equivalent, regardless
of which gcc was used to compile the object files.
We only use ld directly when building the GHCi libraries (HSbase.o
etc.), and this doesn't
foo.exe, not foo. I'll mention this in the user manual
S
| -Original Message-
| From: Wolfgang Jeltsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: 24 September 2002 22:30
| To: The Glasgow Haskell Users Mailing List
| Subject: specifying the name of the executable under Windows
|
| Hi,
|
| if
Hi,
Does Haskell specify how div and mod should behave when
given one or both arguments negative?
Eg, in hugs we get:
div 13 = 0
div (-1) 3 = -1
div 1 (-3) = -1
div (-1) (-3) = 0
and so on.
I've had a bit of a look for where div and mod are
specified exactly, but I can only find
Does Haskell specify how div and mod should behave when
given one or both arguments negative?
Eg, in hugs we get:
div 13 = 0
div (-1) 3 = -1
div 1 (-3) = -1
div (-1) (-3) = 0
and so on.
We usually describe div as the version of division that truncates
towards negative
| Replace:
| A datatype declaration may optionally include field labels for
some
| or all of the components of the type.
| With:
| A datatype declaration may optionally include field labels.
Each
| constructor must use either labelled fields or unlabelled
fields,
| but
Dr Mark H Phillips wrote:
Hi,
Does Haskell specify how div and mod should behave when
given one or both arguments negative?
Yes, section 6.4.2 gives an exact definition.
P.S. I notice in hugs if I type -1 `div` 3 the `div`
binds to the 1 and 3 first, and only applies the -
at the end. Is
| The report says The expression F {}, where F is a data constructor,
is
| legal whether or not F was declared with record syntax, provided F has
no
| strict fields: it denotes F _|_1 ... _|_n where n is the arity of F.
|
| It unclear to me why there needs to be this provision for records with
| The report says The expression F {}, where F is a data constructor,
is
| legal whether or not F was declared with record syntax, provided F has
no
| strict fields: it denotes F _|_1 ... _|_n where n is the arity of F.
|
| It unclear to me why there needs to be this provision for records with
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 12:34:53PM +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
I spoke too soon. Consider
data F = F Int !Int
data S = S { x::Int, y::!Int }
According to the words above
F {} is illegal
but what about this one?
S {}
I think the sentence in question (end of 3.15.2)
| I think the sentence in question (end of 3.15.2) is just a
clarification;
| the preceding 4 rules are sufficient and clear: F{}, S{} and S{x=3}
are
| all illegal because they omit a value for a strict field. That is,
it's
| correct, though not strictly necessary, nor does it cover all the
I am new to haskell.
I am trying to do some excersise but i can't make anything work :(
This is my code.I replaced spaces with underscores ( _ )
Thanks for any suggestions or correctrions
import IO
import System
import List
import Maybe
import Char
import Numeric
type Name=String
type Room=Int
Among other things, please make sure your layout lines up. Also, you
cannot have the definition of getText at the same indentation of
userText-getText otherwise your compiler will think this is part of the
do statement (I believe):
main=do userText-getText
charset=US-ASCII;
charset=US-ASCII;
charset=US-ASCII;
charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 00:12:08 +0300
X-Priority: 3
X-Library: Indy 9.00.10
X-Mailer: Foxmail
Kemoterapinin yan etkileri nedeniyle yorgun ve bitkin düsmüs bir yakininiz mi
Evening,
I'm trying to write a utility that reads in some user preferences from
a pre-determined file, does some work, and exits. Sounds simple enough.
The problem I'm having is with the preferences: How do I make it
available throughout the entire program? (FWIW, most of the work is
AFAIK, the global variable (so-called), passing around, and lifting the IO
monad are your only options. I almost always use the global variable
method since I know that in this case the unsafePerformIO is actually
safe, since writing to the variable will always occur before the call to
upIO and
Sorry, I should also mention implicit parameters, if you're willing to use
that extension. I don't like them, though, and my impression from SPJ is
that it's very unclear whether they will get into Haskell 2 or not...
--
Hal Daume III
Computer science is no more about computers| [EMAIL
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 16:06:29 -0700 (PDT)
Hal Daume III [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't feel bad about doing
this because GHC does this itself for its own configuration :).
I am going to show you that using unsafePerformIO where there really are
side effects leads to unpredictable results,
Evening,
I'm trying to write a utility that reads in some user preferences from
a pre-determined file, does some work, and exits. Sounds simple enough.
The problem I'm having is with the preferences: How do I make it
available throughout the entire program? (FWIW, most of the work is
I don't mean to troll, but this isn't what I meant. Suppose we have:
data Configuration = ... -- config data
globalConfig :: IORef Configuration
globalConfig = unsafePerformIO (newIORef undefined)
Now, we define an unsafe function to read the configuration:
getConfig ::
Dear Sir or Madam
In the past you have requested information on discounted products. We hope that you
find this of interest. If you are not a smoker, and find this email offensive, we
sincerely apologise! We will be only too happy to take you off our mailing list.
If you are a smoker,
G'day all.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 12:06:36AM +0100, Liyang Hu wrote:
The problem I'm having is with the preferences: How do I make it
available throughout the entire program? (FWIW, most of the work is
effectively done inside the IO monad.) I could explicitly pass the
record around
34 matches
Mail list logo
