Simon,
> As I understand it, it can work side-by-side with the existing build
> system, correct? That means we don't need to make an either/or
> choice, which is very helpful.
That's correct. Note though that the two build systems put (some) build results
in the same directories, e.g. inplace/b
You're correct. Please forget that name.
On Jan 25, 2016 12:33 PM, "wren romano" wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:34 AM, Richard Eisenberg
> wrote:
> > But I suggest a different name. Ground? Terminating? NormalForm?
> Irreducible? ValueType? I don't love any of these, but I love Sane less.
>
George Colpitts writes:
> I believe that static linking will produce a faster program, at least in
> some situations. If so it would be good to mention this in section 8.2 of
> the user's guide, *Faster: producing a program that runs quicker, *
>
Indeed it would be a good idea to mention this. W
George Colpitts writes:
> I believe that static linking will produce a faster program, at least in
> some situations. If so it would be good to mention this in section 8.2 of
> the user's guide, *Faster: producing a program that runs quicker, *
>
> I couldn't find documentation for the -dynamic-
Simon Peyton Jones writes:
> Making it part of *every* validate is a big ask because it takes so
> long to build.
>
> But we already have "sh validate --slow", which runs a lot more tests
> than --fast. So maybe it could be part of --slow?
>
> And I do think that we should have a nightly build (a
Yes, if we can arrange that Ground a implies that Equals a [a] reduces to
False, with
type family Equals a b where
Equals a a = True
Equals a b = False
But getting that to work is admittedly a feature beyond what's proposed.
On Jan 25, 2016, at 9:21 AM, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
> I’m a b
I’m a bit dubious about whether it’s worth the effort of making this an
extension that requires GHC support. Does the gain justify the (maybe-small but
eternal) pain
Simon
From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Richard
Eisenberg
Sent: 25 January 2016 14:06
To: David
Might be nice to have whnf too, while we're at it. Perhaps whnf is enough for
someone and going all the way to nf would be less efficient / impossible.
Richard
On Jan 25, 2016, at 8:44 AM, David Feuer wrote:
> I don't care about the name at all. Unstuck? Would we want to distinguish
> between
Simon Peyton Jones writes:
> Very good.
>
> As I understand it, it can work side-by-side with the existing build
> system, correct? That means we don't need to make an either/or choice,
> which is very helpful.
>
> Every day I do sh validate --fast --no-clean How can I do that using
> Shake
I don't care about the name at all. Unstuck? Would we want to distinguish
between whnf (e.g., Proxy Any) and nf, or is only nf sufficiently useful?
On Jan 25, 2016 7:34 AM, "Richard Eisenberg" wrote:
> +1
>
> This would be very easy to implement, too.
>
> But I suggest a different name. Ground? T
+1
This would be very easy to implement, too.
But I suggest a different name. Ground? Terminating? NormalForm? Irreducible?
ValueType? I don't love any of these, but I love Sane less.
On Jan 24, 2016, at 4:24 PM, David Feuer wrote:
> Since type families can be stuck, it's sometimes useful to
As discussed on IRC, your approach below looks right to me: dropWhile
(isLevityTy . idType) args. But you then said this wasn't working for you. What
does (map idType args) say?
Richard
On Jan 24, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Ömer Sinan Ağacan wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm looking for a reliable way of drop
Very good.
As I understand it, it can work side-by-side with the existing build system,
correct? That means we don't need to make an either/or choice, which is very
helpful.
Every day I do
sh validate --fast --no-clean
How can I do that using Shake to build? Maybe
sh validate
13 matches
Mail list logo
