Smaller example of this behavior:
array ((0,0),(1,1)) [((1,1),6)] ! (0,3)
6
--
Eric Mertens
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Here's the bug:
{-# INLINE safeIndex #-}
safeIndex :: Ix i = (i, i) - Int - i - Int
safeIndex (l,u) n i = let i' = unsafeIndex (l,u) i
in if (0 = i') (i' n)
then i'
else error Error in array index
unsafeIndex here is just
Hello,
It seems this bug has already been submitted:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/2120
Thanks for the help.
__
Donnie Jones
On 3/14/08, Cale Gibbard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's the bug:
{-# INLINE safeIndex #-}
safeIndex :: Ix i = (i, i) - Int - i - Int
safeIndex (l,u) n
Hello,
I'm learning Haskell, so I was attempting memoization based upon the
Fibonacci examples but for the Ackermann function. In my tests, I found
what seems to be truncated output. See my comments at the end of the code
for the test cases and output.
### Begin Code ###
module Main where
On Mar 13, 2008, at 23:47 , Donnie Jones wrote:
It seems if I don't choose an upper bound pair for (m,n) that is
large enough I get truncated output for the answer, instead of GHC
giving me an array index exception... This behavior seems very odd
to me, can someone explain? Or is this a
