Thanks for the reminder! I've added a section [1] on setCallStack with
my explanation from above.
[1]:
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/ExplicitCallStack/ImplicitLocations#GeneralizingtosetCallStack
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016, at 10:50, Ben Gamari wrote:
> Simon Peyton Jones writes:
>
> > OK. Let
Simon Peyton Jones writes:
> OK. Let's make sure the wiki page and documentation reflects this.
>
It looks like the Wiki [1] hasn't yet been updated. Let's make sure this
happens.
Thanks!
- Ben
[1] https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/ExplicitCallStack/ImplicitLocations
signature.asc
Descr
OK. Let's make sure the wiki page and documentation reflects this.
Thanks
SImon
| -Original Message-
| From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Eric
| Seidel
| Sent: 27 January 2016 18:16
| To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: CallStack naming
|
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016, at 04:07, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
> | It’d probably need a built-in function
> |
> | setCallStack :: CallStack -> (AppendsCallStack => a) -> a
>
> Correct. This is easy to write in Core but not in Haskell.
Ugh, I just realized that we can't write setCallStack (with imp
uary 2016 16:15
| To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: CallStack naming
|
| On Thu, Jan 21, 2016, at 04:07, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
| > Well, in the short term, let's
| > * bikeshed about names
|
| Ok, I don't like ICallStack :) It sounds like a C# interface, whic
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016, at 04:07, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
> Well, in the short term, let's
> * bikeshed about names
Ok, I don't like ICallStack :) It sounds like a C# interface, which,
while technically sort of accurate, is very misleading since users will
never write an instance. I'd prefer som
On 2016-01-20 at 06:39:32 +0100, Richard Eisenberg wrote:
> I'm sure there's an easy answer to this, but I'm wondering: why is the
> CallStack feature implemented with implicit parameters instead of just
> a magical constraint? Whenever I use this feature, I don't want to
> have to enable -XImplici
et
8.0 out with an API that we like
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of
| Joachim Breitner
| Sent: 21 January 2016 09:19
| To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: CallStack naming
|
| Hi,
|
| Am Mittwoch, den 20.01.2016, 09:24 -08
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 20.01.2016, 09:24 -0800 schrieb Eric Seidel:
> The problem is that I don't know how to implement
> `withFrozenCallStack`
> (included in the wiki) as a Haskell function if CallStacks aren't
> implicit parameters under-the-hood.
breaking it further down, the problem is not with
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016, at 08:14, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
> | > * In principle you might have multiple call stacks kicking around
> | > at the same time
> | > boo :: (?a::CallStack, ?b::CallStack) => Int -> Int
> | > Now I'm not really sure what is supposed to happen about solving
> |
| > * In principle you might have multiple call stacks kicking around
| > at the same time
| > boo :: (?a::CallStack, ?b::CallStack) => Int -> Int
| > Now I'm not really sure what is supposed to happen about solving
| > these constraints. Perhaps it could be a feature, but it's not
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016, at 02:25, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
> | > undefined :: AppendsCallStack => a
> |
> | Seems simpler. Is it problems with a nullary class?
>
> Hmm. Actually I think that's quite a good idea.
I agree, this is much nicer than enabling ImplicitParams and having to
remember t
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 20.01.2016, 09:56 -0500 schrieb Richard Eisenberg:
> Eek. That's a bug. :(
There we go: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11466
Greetings,
Joachim
--
Joachim “nomeata” Breitner
m...@joachim-breitner.de • http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
Jabber: nome...@joachim-brei
On Jan 20, 2016, at 6:50 AM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> With GHC-HEAD, it compiles no longer(!):
>
>[1 of 2] Compiling AppendCallStack ( AppendCallStack.hs,
>AppendCallStack.o )
>
>AppendCallStack.hs:6:1: error:
>• Illegal implicit parameter ‘?callStack::CallStack’
>
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 20.01.2016, 10:32 + schrieb Simon Peyton Jones:
> > foo x :: AppendsCallStack => a -> a
>
> Remove the "x"!
heh. Silly me. So let’s try again:
With 7.10 it now works:
==> AppendCallStack.hs <==
{-# LANGUAGE ConstraintKinds, ImplicitParams #-}
module Appen
| foo x :: AppendsCallStack => a -> a
Remove the "x"!
S
| -Original Message-
| From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of
| Joachim Breitner
| Sent: 20 January 2016 09:08
| To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: CallStack naming
|
| I'm sure there's an easy answer to this, but I'm wondering: why is the
| CallStack feature implemented with implicit parameters instead of just
| a magical constraint? Whenever I use this feature, I don't want to
| have to enable -XImplicitParams and then make sure I get the name
| right. Wh
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 20.01.2016, 00:39 -0500 schrieb Richard Eisenberg:
> I'm sure there's an easy answer to this, but I'm wondering: why is
> the CallStack feature implemented with implicit parameters instead of
> just a magical constraint? Whenever I use this feature, I don't want
> to have to e
18 matches
Mail list logo
