On 18/05/2014 15:20, Ömer Sinan Ağacan wrote:
Thanks again for the answer.
Not sure what _call_ is suppose to be. What's the context?
In Simon Marlow's slides, stack traces are implemented in terms of
call and push operations. I guess `push` in STG syntax is stands
for push operation
Thanks Peter. Simon Marlow's talk was really interesting. After
reading the slides I read related GHC code and realized that
cost-centre stack and the stack trace printed using GHC.Stack is
same thing. `libraries/base/GHC/Stack.hsc` has this definition:
currentCallStack :: IO [String]
Ömer Sinan Ağacan wrote:
(off-topic: I'm wondering why an empty tuple is passed to `getCurrentCSS`?)
See the comment on getCurrentCCS# in compiler/prelude/primops.txt.pp -
it's a token to prevent GHC optimisations from floating the primop up
(which obviously might change the call stack).
Now
Thanks again for the answer.
Not sure what _call_ is suppose to be. What's the context?
In Simon Marlow's slides, stack traces are implemented in terms of
call and push operations. I guess `push` in STG syntax is stands
for push operation explained in the slides but as far as I can see
call is
Hi all,
I'm trying to understand the paper Time and space profiling for
non-strict, higher-order functional languages[1] and I'm hoping that
experienced GHC devs here could help me clarifying some points. Here's
my question:
In Figure 5, I don't understand why no costs are attributed to `app2`
Ömer Sinan Ağacan wrote:
To me it looks like that there should be two costs attributed in
application rules. First cost is evaluation of the function
part(which should be attributed in `app1` rule) and second is
substitution part, which should be attributed in `app2` rule but
according to
