Juan Carlos Arevalo Baeza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmmm... I guess I'll have to look more closely into the Hugs
documentation. I wasn't aware that it had profiling in it
too... O:-) And, looking closer, this option is not mentioned
anywhere, and it rejects the option. Hmmm... I have
Juan Carlos Arevalo Baeza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Seems to me like Haskell could do with a better list primitive,
where you can pattern-match on either side (with two constructors,
so to speak).
It does have better lists - Chris Okasaki's Edison library provides
a wholbunch of variants
[Metacomment: the only way to really answer your question is to use
one of the debugging tools mentioned previously in the space leak
threads. For large programs, anything else is just a list of
guesses.]
I think the space leak lies in the code you did not show us.
What does step look like?
I hate to followup to myself, but looks like I had to. I really was
too tired and lazy version could be obtained by simple use of
accumulator:
Are you _sure_ that's all it takes?
I was expecting that you'd need 'unsafeInterleaveIO'. (This function
is used to implement hGetContents. Some
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am a student who study a computer programing. I want to have
Haskell software to study . However, it is very hard to get
the Haskell . and I hope you give me the way to get the Heskell.
If you mail me to show the way to get the Heskell , I would
appreciate your
Is there a reason why partial application cannot be
applied in arbitrary order? Was it a technical difficulty in the
design of Haskell? Or is it just following beta reduction
rigorously?
Haskell doesn't dictate any particular evaluation order. If you look
at the name of the Haskell report,
