On Monday 06 September 2010 10:47:54, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> Daniel Fischer schrieb:
> > On Sunday 05 September 2010 21:52:44, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> >> Daniel Fischer schrieb:
> >>> Yes. Ordinarily, lines in text files aren't longer than a few
> >>> hundred characters, leaking those, who
Daniel Fischer schrieb:
> On Sunday 05 September 2010 21:52:44, Henning Thielemann wrote:
>> Daniel Fischer schrieb:
>>> Yes. Ordinarily, lines in text files aren't longer than a few hundred
>>> characters, leaking those, who cares?
>> I got several space leaks of this kind in the past. They are ve
On Sunday 05 September 2010 21:52:44, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> Daniel Fischer schrieb:
> > Yes. Ordinarily, lines in text files aren't longer than a few hundred
> > characters, leaking those, who cares?
>
> I got several space leaks of this kind in the past. They are very
> annoying. They are es
Daniel Fischer schrieb:
> Yes. Ordinarily, lines in text files aren't longer than a few hundred
> characters, leaking those, who cares?
I got several space leaks of this kind in the past. They are very
annoying. They are especially annoying if input comes from the outside
world, where people can
On Saturday 04 September 2010 00:21:39, Jan Christiansen wrote:
> On 03.09.2010, at 14:38, Daniel Fischer wrote:
> > I can't reproduce that. For me, it leaks also with profiling.
>
> Have you used optimizations?
Of course. Always do :)
> It disappears if I compile the program with -O2.
Yeah, wit
On 10-09-03 06:11 AM, Henning Thielemann wrote:
Yes, something this way. (<) suggests a notion of magnitude for me,
which some orderings do not have.
Like for example -1000 has a larger magnitude than -0.0001, therefore
you also reject the common ordering -1000 < -0.0001?
http://groups.googl
On 03.09.2010, at 14:38, Daniel Fischer wrote:
I can't reproduce that. For me, it leaks also with profiling.
Have you used optimizations? It disappears if I compile the program
with -O2.
Without profiling I get the following. Here the maximum residency is
nearly 45MB.
$ ghc --make Tem
On Friday 03 September 2010 12:28:43, Jan Christiansen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 03.09.2010, at 01:32, Daniel Fischer wrote:
> > No surprise, there aren't many 'ä's in Shakespeare's works, are there?
>
> nope
>
> > On the other hand, the current implementation of lines does not seem
> > to
> > suffer fro
On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 12:02:22 +1000, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
wrote:
> What precisely do you mean by natural ordering?
An ordering that has relevant meaning for the information represented
by the datatype. Ideally, it should also be alone in being the order
anyone would expect this datatype to have (b
On 03/09/10 11:11, Henning Thielemann wrote:
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic schrieb:
On 3 September 2010 04:57, Arie Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 19:30:17 +0200, Daniel Fischer
wrote:
Why would one consider using Ord for Map an abuse?
A kludge, for performance reasons, but an abuse?
Because i
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic schrieb:
On 3 September 2010 04:57, Arie Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 19:30:17 +0200, Daniel Fischer
wrote:
Why would one consider using Ord for Map an abuse?
A kludge, for performance reasons, but an abuse?
Because it forces one to declare Ord instances for type
On Sep 2, 2010, at 11:35 PM, Henning Thielemann wrote:
But in the lattice example the roles of 0 and 1 are interchangeable,
aren't they?
Sort of. If you try to interchange the roles of 0 and 1, you are
interchanging the roles of the meet and join operations. In short,
you are constructi
On 3 September 2010 04:57, Arie Peterson wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 19:30:17 +0200, Daniel Fischer
> wrote:
>> Why would one consider using Ord for Map an abuse?
>> A kludge, for performance reasons, but an abuse?
>
> Because it forces one to declare Ord instances for types which have no
> natur
On Sep 2, 2010, at 9:10 AM, Stephen Sinclair wrote:
Sorry to go a bit off topic, but I find it funny that I never really
noticed you could perform less-than or greater-than comparisons on
Bool values. What's the semantic reasoning behind allowing relative
comparisons on booleans? In what cont
On Friday 03 September 2010 00:22:14, Jan Christiansen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 02.09.2010, at 13:41, Daniel Fischer wrote:
> > takes a little to run and keeps the entire file until the first
> > occurrence
> > of pat in memory.
>
> first of all thanks very much for the detailed instructions.
>
> I have
Hi,
On 02.09.2010, at 13:41, Daniel Fischer wrote:
takes a little to run and keeps the entire file until the first
occurrence
of pat in memory.
first of all thanks very much for the detailed instructions.
I have rewritten the example slightly using Strings instead of
Bytestrings. Replaci
On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 19:30:17 +0200, Daniel Fischer
wrote:
> Why would one consider using Ord for Map an abuse?
> A kludge, for performance reasons, but an abuse?
Because it forces one to declare Ord instances for types which have no
natural ordering. It is useful to *not* have such instances, in o
On 10-09-02 12:10 PM, Stephen Sinclair wrote:
Sorry to go a bit off topic, but I find it funny that I never really
noticed you could perform less-than or greater-than comparisons on
Bool values. What's the semantic reasoning behind allowing relative
comparisons on booleans? In what context woul
On Thursday 02 September 2010 18:25:11, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> The Ord instance for Bool might be justified for using Bools as keys of
> Data.Map, however you can also consider using Ord for Map as abuse.
Why would one consider using Ord for Map an abuse?
A kludge, for performance reasons, bu
On 02/09/10 17:10, Stephen Sinclair wrote:
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 3:25 AM, Jan Christiansen
wrote:
I prefer
False<= _|_ = True
Sorry to go a bit off topic, but I find it funny that I never really
noticed you could perform less-than or greater-than comparisons on
Bool values. Wha
On Thu, 2 Sep 2010, Stephen Sinclair wrote:
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 3:25 AM, Jan Christiansen
wrote:
I prefer
False <= _|_ = True
Sorry to go a bit off topic, but I find it funny that I never really
noticed you could perform less-than or greater-than comparisons on
Bool values. What's the
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 3:25 AM, Jan Christiansen
wrote:
> I prefer
>
> False <= _|_ = True
Sorry to go a bit off topic, but I find it funny that I never really
noticed you could perform less-than or greater-than comparisons on
Bool values. What's the semantic reasoning behind allowing relative
Jan Christiansen schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> On 02.09.2010, at 01:35, Daniel Fischer wrote:
>
>> It's not that it's not as non-strict as possible per se. (Sorry, had
>> to :)
>> It's that intersperse's current definition (in GHC at least) can cause a
>> space leak. In this case, making the function less s
On Thursday 02 September 2010 09:25:59, Jan Christiansen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 02.09.2010, at 01:35, Daniel Fischer wrote:
> > It's not that it's not as non-strict as possible per se. (Sorry, had
> > to :)
> > It's that intersperse's current definition (in GHC at least) can
> > cause a
> > space leak
Hi,
On 02.09.2010, at 01:35, Daniel Fischer wrote:
It's not that it's not as non-strict as possible per se. (Sorry, had
to :)
It's that intersperse's current definition (in GHC at least) can
cause a
space leak. In this case, making the function less strict can cure
it, in
other cases, mor
On Thursday 02 September 2010 00:05:03, Jan Christiansen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there is a new ticket that Data.List.intersperse is not as non-strict
> as possible (http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4282).
It's not that it's not as non-strict as possible per se. (Sorry, had to :)
It's that inte
Hi,
there is a new ticket that Data.List.intersperse is not as non-strict
as possible (http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4282). I have
observed some other functions which are unnecessarily strict and it
might be advantageous to change their definitions as well.
I think it is know
27 matches
Mail list logo
