RE: unsafeperformio

2004-06-15 Thread Simon Marlow
On 15 June 2004 10:37, Ford Prefect wrote: > I added a new option to ghc (6.2.1 release) -Of?le, > wh?ch read opt?ons from a f?le us?ng unsafeperform?oç > When I try to comp?le cop?s of the same f?le w?th > d?fferent opt?ons (same d?rectory, but -o to d?fferent > f?le) somet?mes I get error messag

Re: unsafePerformIO unsafe.on Linux

2000-07-18 Thread George Russell
Michael Weber wrote: > Add: > {-# NOINLINE objectid #-} > to Obj.hs and it does the trick :-) (IIRC, this is documented) If GHC is cloning the MVar deliberately, why doesn't it do it if you put the whole thing in one file? Anyway relying on the compiler not inlining something seems a bit of

Re: unsafePerformIO unsafe.on Linux

2000-07-17 Thread Michael Weber
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 16:31:53 +0200, George Russell wrote: > The output from obj should be [0,1,2,3,4,5,6]. It looks as if GHC is > cloning the MVar ... > Correct observation :-) Add: {-# NOINLINE objectid #-} to Obj.hs and it does the trick :-) (IIRC, this is documented) Cheer