On 19/11/09 12:17, Simon Marlow wrote:
Ok, unless there are any further objections, I'll change the names back to
class NFData a where
rnf :: a - ()
and also add
deepseq :: a - b - b
but I'll leave the module name as Control.DeepSeq.
I made this change and uploaded deepseq-1.1.0.0 on
On 18/11/2009 04:05, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
The documentation claim that The default implementation of 'deepseq'
is simply 'seq' is not exactly right, as `deepseq` and `seq` have
different signatures.
Yes indeed. In order to use deepseq, it looks like I also need some way
to force the ()
On 19/11/2009 11:52, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
Yitzchak Gale wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
So then what shall we call the a - () version?
One possibility is to go back to calling it rnf.
In light of apfelmus' comment, I vote for rnf.
And in that case, how about the analogous alternative for
On 18/11/2009 03:48, Dean Herington wrote:
At 11:00 AM + 11/17/09, Simon Marlow wrote:
I've just uploaded deepseq-1.0.0.0 to Hackage
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/deepseq
This provides a DeepSeq class with a deepseq method, equivalent to the
existing NFData/rnf in the parallel
Hello Simon,
Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 12:17:31 PM, you wrote:
You could argue that (a - b - b) is doing more than (a - ()),
if i correctly understand, we have two versions:
1) easier to use
2) more efficient
and one of them may be defined via another? how about providing both
versions,
Simon Marlow wrote:
I've just uploaded deepseq-1.0.0.0 to Hackage
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/deepseq
This provides a DeepSeq class with a deepseq method, equivalent to the
existing NFData/rnf in the parallel package. I'll be using this in a
newly revamped parallel package,
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 09:17 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
So the main difference is that with the current formulation of deepseq,
you need to explicitly force the result in order to use it, either with
a pattern match, another seq, or a pseq. If we used (a - b - b) then
the top-level forcing
On Tue, 2009-11-17 at 11:00 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
I've just uploaded deepseq-1.0.0.0 to Hackage
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/deepseq
This provides a DeepSeq class with a deepseq method, equivalent to the
existing NFData/rnf in the parallel package. I'll be using this in a
At 11:00 AM + 11/17/09, Simon Marlow wrote:
I've just uploaded deepseq-1.0.0.0 to Hackage
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/deepseq
This provides a DeepSeq class with a deepseq method, equivalent to
the existing NFData/rnf in the parallel package. I'll be using this
in a newly
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Dean Herington
heringtonla...@mindspring.com wrote:
The documentation claim that The default implementation of 'deepseq' is
simply 'seq' is not exactly right, as `deepseq` and `seq` have different
signatures. Which raises the more interesting question: Why did
The documentation claim that The default implementation of
'deepseq' is simply 'seq' is not exactly right, as `deepseq` and
`seq` have different signatures.
Yes indeed. In order to use deepseq, it looks like I also need some
way to force the () return value, e.g.
let res = deepseq
11 matches
Mail list logo
