Ian Holyer wrote:
> [...]
> As far as we can see, the problem boils down to a classic known problem: [...]
>
>let (x,y) = e in ...
>
> [...]
> I know of two solutions for handling it. One is for the compiler to generate
> special code for "let (x,y) = e in ..." where the code for evaluating
> Space leaks like this are lurking in a lot of places in the standard
> prelude, so it's quite funny that Hugs/GHC don't address this problem,
> although solutions are known.
>
> What's the behaviour of NHC/HBC in these cases?
hbc has 876 bytes in use on the heap and the stack is 13 entries dee
>> Space leaks like this are lurking in a lot of places in the standard
>> prelude, so it's quite funny that Hugs/GHC don't address this problem,
>> although solutions are known.
>>
>> What's the behaviour of NHC/HBC in these cases?
>hbc has 876 bytes in use on the heap and the stack is 13 entri
On Thu, 27 Nov 1997, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
> >> What's the behaviour of NHC/HBC in these cases?
>
> >hbc has 876 bytes in use on the heap and the stack is 13 entries deep.
>
> nhc13 has 220 bytes in use in the heap.
What do these numbers mean?
The Glasgow Haskell Compiler -- version 2.09
==
We are pleased to announce a new release of the Glasgow Haskell
Compiler (GHC), version 2.09. Source distribution is freely available
via the World-Wide Web and through anon. FTP;
I'm sure this must have been thought of before, but I couldn't find
any literature discussing it so...
Two questions:
1) Is it possible for a set to define a monad?
2) Does anyone know if it's possible to define an instance of monads
for sets in Haskell? Even with multi-parameter type class
