That’s an interesting idea. Manuel
> Edward Kmett <[email protected]>: > > Would it be possible to add unsafe primops to add Array# and SmallArray# > entries to an ArrayArray#? The fact that the ArrayArray# entries are all > directly unlifted avoiding a level of indirection for the containing > structure is amazing, but I can only currently use it if my leaf level data > can be 100% unboxed and distributed among ByteArray#s. It'd be nice to be > able to have the ability to put SmallArray# a stuff down at the leaves to > hold lifted contents. > > I accept fully that if I name the wrong type when I go to access one of the > fields it'll lie to me, but I suppose it'd do that if i tried to use one of > the members that held a nested ArrayArray# as a ByteArray# anyways, so it > isn't like there is a safety story preventing this. > > I've been hunting for ways to try to kill the indirection problems I get with > Haskell and mutable structures, and I could shoehorn a number of them into > ArrayArrays if this worked. > > Right now I'm stuck paying for 2 or 3 levels of unnecessary indirection > compared to c/java and this could reduce that pain to just 1 level of > unnecessary indirection. > > -Edward > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
