Glad I could provide some useful thoughts!
> You are to some extent correct; an unwillingness to release before major
> (for some definition of "major") bugs are fixed will inevitably lead to
> slips. However, I think a faster release cycle will make it easier to
> accept releases with such bugs (
Shayan Najd writes:
> Currently AST declarations, their relate utilities, and `Outputable`
> instances are defined in the same files.
> Does anyone object to moving `Outputable` instances to separate files?
> The purpose is to gradually identify reusable functionalities, group them
> together, po
Bardur Arantsson writes:
> On 2017-08-02 21:26, Bardur Arantsson wrote:
>
>> I'd like to add a few thoughs (or just to underscore the ones you've
>> already brought forth, as the case may be):
>>
> [--snip--]
>> reasons -- I wouldn't presume to know. Also note that this is
>> *basically* how Rus
Hi,
I also think we should do this but it has a lot of ramifications:
contant folding in Core, codegen, TH, etc.
Also it will break codes that use primitive types directly, so maybe
it's worth a ghc proposal.
Sylvain
On 01/08/2017 15:37, Michal Terepeta wrote:
Hi all,
I'm working on mak
Hello everyone,
I will be travelling starting tomorrow through next week. During this
time I'll still try to check in on things once a day to make sure
nothing is burning down. However, I will be a bit less available. Still
feel free to ping me via email or IRC, however. I'll try to get back to
yo
On 2017-08-02 21:26, Bardur Arantsson wrote:
> I'd like to add a few thoughs (or just to underscore the ones you've
> already brought forth, as the case may be):
>
[--snip--]
> reasons -- I wouldn't presume to know. Also note that this is
> *basically* how Rust also works, it's just that they kee
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 4:19 AM Ben Gamari wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I just posted a pair of posts on the GHC blog [1,2] laying out some
> thoughts on the GHC release cycle timing [1] and how this relates to the
> in-progress Jenkins build infrastructure [2]. When you have a some time
> feel
On 2017-08-01 15:05, Ara Adkins wrote:
> Heya,
>
> I very much agree with the thoughts on the variability of the release
> cadence. The following is somewhat of a stream of consciousness as I
> read, so please excuse any lack of coherence.
>
> When you talk about the bugs being significant block
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 8:08 PM Carter Schonwald
wrote:
> One issue with packed fields is that on many architectures you can't
quite do subword reads or
> writes. So it might not always be a win.
Could you give any examples?
Note that we're still going to do aligned read/writes, i.e., `Int32#`
w
Ara Adkins writes:
> Heya,
>
> I very much agree with the thoughts on the variability of the release
> cadence. The following is somewhat of a stream of consciousness as I
> read, so please excuse any lack of coherence.
>
> When you talk about the bugs being significant blockers to the latest
> r
Can you be more specific? I don’t think occurrence info is used at all in STG.
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Gabor
| Greif
| Sent: 01 August 2017 16:02
| To: ghc-devs
| Subject: Occurrence info on binders and STG
|
| Hi d
I don’t object. (They’d be orphan instances, so the interface file will
always be loaded; but that’s probably ok.
From: Shayan Najd [mailto:sh.n...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 August 2017 11:50
To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
Cc: Simon Peyton Jones ; Alan & Kim Zimmerman
Subject: Restructuring hsSyn
Curren
Currently AST declarations, their relate utilities, and `Outputable`
instances are defined in the same files.
Does anyone object to moving `Outputable` instances to separate files?
The purpose is to gradually identify reusable functionalities, group them
together, polish them (e.g., remove some unn
Joachim
Aha! I think my comment on Phab is redundant. You are simply avoiding name
capture, which is obviously right; you are not restricting the applicability of
the transformation.
Needless to say, a Note would help in due course.
S
| -Original Message-
| From: ghc-commits [mail
Based on memory rather that investigation:
- yes it works on any data type
- The reason that the primop dataToTag# is dangerous is that it does
not evaluate its argument; it relies on the wrapper getTag to do
so.Caveat emptor! It would be good to document this.
Simon
| -Original M
15 matches
Mail list logo
