D'oh, yeah that is better. You know, I actually had that and had
expanded it because I was going to seq both the input and the result
of the (+1), but punted on it and didn't switch back to the more
compact format.
-Ross
On Jun 19, 2009, at 12:45 AM, Luke Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Ross Mellgren <rmm-
hask...@z.odi.ac> wrote:
It looks offhand like you're not being strict enough when you put
things back in the IORef, and so it's building up thunks of (+1)...
With two slight mods:
go 0 = return ()
go n = do modifyIORef ior (+1)
go (n-1)
-->
go 0 = return ()
go n = do modifyIORef ior (\ x -> let x' = x+1 in x `seq` x')
go (n-1)
Just a slight prettification of that line:
modifyIORef ior ((1+) $!)
Or applied prefix if you prefer. Prefix ($!) has the nice
interpretation as the HOF that makes its argument into a strict
function.
Luke
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
