Nope. On Monday, August 12, 2013, Ryan Newton wrote:
> Do you have a branch already lined up for your LLVM-atomics work? > > > > On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Carter Schonwald < > carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > huh, did I suggest viewing it as a bug fix? my mistake! (a branch would > make sense) > > > On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Ryan Newton <rrnew...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well for new features like this (rather than bug fix), I'd prefer if I > could get commit access and at least push it to a branch. I can create a > new trac ticket too. > > > On Saturday, August 3, 2013, Carter Schonwald wrote: > > took a quick look, awesome! this will make it MUCH MUCH easier for me to > do my work. Thank you very much. > > off hand, to prevent patch confusion, > it naively seems like the nicest way to post the patches to trac is to > post a *new ticket to trac* that links to the main one, > plus add a comment on the main ticket a link to the new ticket for the > c/cmm based versions of the primops. > > At least, given that theres likely going to be a bit of discussion on > just your ticket perhaps, better to factor that into a related ticket to > make it easier to keep track of that? > > (i'm also possibly over thinking this enormously, so i could be way off > base) > > > > On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Carter Schonwald < > carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > nvm, githubs backup, i'll have a look! :) > > > On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:05 PM, Carter Schonwald < > carter.schonw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > awesome! (this will also make my work easier) > > ryan: github is down, could you put the branch on bitbucket or some such > so I can have a lookseee/clone locally? > > thanks! > -Carter > > > On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 4:01 AM, Ryan Newton <rrnew...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Just to keep you all up to date... I'm adding the primops in question and > validating the individual commits before putting them here: > > https://github.com/rrnewton/ghc/commits/atomicPrimOps > > The basic idea for using these extensions is: > > - the atomic-primops library will work in 7.6 or 7.7+. It will use > ifdefs to decide whether to use its own primops or GHC-builtin > - future versions will simply get faster, as Carter replaces > out-of-line primops that *also* use C calls, with inline primops / LLVM > equivalents > > Shall I stick a patch on a ticket, or will someone volunteer to pull? > What's the protocol for requesting commit access anyway? (By the way, can > someone share the reason that pull-requests to the github ghc mirror are > such a no-no? They seem no worse than a patch in an email which the big > warning > sign <https://github.com/ghc/ghc> recommends.) > > Best, > -Ryan > > P.S. FYI, I'm periodically getting these: > > 0 caused framework failures > 0 unexpected passes > 1 unexpected failures > > Unexpected failures: > perf/compiler T1969 [stat not good enough] (normal) > > Can that just be because of running on a loaded machine? How narrow are > these windows? > > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Ryan Newton <rrnew...@gmail.com> wrote: > >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs