ndmitchell: > Hi > > > > That would work on GHC, but not on Hugs. > > > > Optimisation and Hugs don't go together anyway. > > I want the code to work on Hugs, and perform fast on GHC. As it turns > out, for this particular application, Hugs is faster than GHCi by > about 25%. Optimisation and ghci don't go together, so I don't know what your point is there.
Anyway, its the same with ByteString -- we have it work in ghci or hugs or nhc, but its only worth actually optimising for GHC. -- Don _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
