Re: StgCase - are LiveVars and SRT fields going to be used?

2016-02-06 Thread Ömer Sinan Ağacan
I submitted https://phabricator.haskell.org/D1889 which hopefully fixes this properly. 2016-02-05 21:50 GMT-05:00 Ömer Sinan Ağacan : > Simon, I broke the debug build with that commit. I actually validated locally > before committing, but apparently the default validate

Re: Language complexity & beginners (Was: New type of ($) operator in GHC 8.0 is problematic)

2016-02-06 Thread Bardur Arantsson
On 02/06/2016 03:55 PM, Roman Cheplyaka wrote: > But despite all the negativity in this thread, I want to say that your > work on this and other aspects of GHC is very much appreciated. Keep it up! > +1000 ___ ghc-devs mailing list

Re: [Haskell-cafe] New type of ($) operator in GHC 8.0 is problematic

2016-02-06 Thread Edward Kmett
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Mike Izbicki wrote: > > We're in a bit of a bind in all this. We really need the fancy type for > ($) > > so that it can be used in all situations where it is used currently. The > old > > type for ($) was just a plain old lie. Now, at least,

Re: Language complexity & beginners (Was: New type of ($) operator in GHC 8.0 is problematic)

2016-02-06 Thread Richard Eisenberg
I have made a ticket #11549 (https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11549) requesting a -fshow-runtime-rep flag (recalling that the name levity will soon be outdated) as described in this thread. I will make sure this gets in for the release of 8.0. Other points: - You're quite right that

Re: [GHC] #7803: Superclass methods are left unspecialized

2016-02-06 Thread Eric Crockett
My apologies for that. Please ignore. On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Eric Crockett wrote: > https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7803#comment:12 > > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 11:14 AM, GHC wrote: > >> #7803: Superclass methods are left

Re: [GHC] #7803: Superclass methods are left unspecialized

2016-02-06 Thread Eric Crockett
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7803#comment:12 On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 11:14 AM, GHC wrote: > #7803: Superclass methods are left unspecialized > -+- > Reporter: akio |

Re: New type of ($) operator in GHC 8.0 is problematic

2016-02-06 Thread Oleg Grenrus
> On 06 Feb 2016, at 15:30, ghc-d...@stefan-klinger.de wrote: > > Richard, thank you very much for your elaborate statement. The > problem I see with a `BeginnersPrelude` is that it will either > outdate, or create a bubble escaping from which is so painful that > most new Haskell programmers

Re: New type of ($) operator in GHC 8.0 is problematic

2016-02-06 Thread Manuel M T Chakravarty
That makes a lot of sense to me. Manuel > Roman Cheplyaka : > > On 02/05/2016 01:31 AM, Edward Z. Yang wrote: >> I'm not really sure how you would change the type of 'id' based on >> a language pragma. >> >> How do people feel about a cosmetic fix, where we introduce a new >>

Re: Language complexity & beginners (Was: New type of ($) operator in GHC 8.0 is problematic)

2016-02-06 Thread Roman Cheplyaka
On 02/06/2016 02:09 AM, Richard Eisenberg wrote: > The old type of ($) was always a lie. -XMagicHash just changes the > parser, allowing the # suffix. It is only by convention that most (all?) > unlifted things end in #. The old type of ($) was perhaps a harmless > lie, but a lie nonetheless. > >