In the new GHCi system we plan to make it *required* that the module name
and the file name
match, EXCEPT for module Main.
This seems to remove a whole class of errors.
Yell if that'll be problematic for you
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi again,
unfortunately I forgot to ask my questions ;o)
What does heapCensus mean ?
What can I do to avoid this error ?
> I have compiled all files with the -prof and the -auto-all flag.
>
> When starting the program
>
> * without any RTS options -> everything is OK
> * with +RTS -p
Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote,
> I can never resist messages like these, even when I'm meant
> to be doing other things.
That's good to know ;-)
> It's very helpful when people offer
> fairly precise performance-bug reports. Thanks!
Thanks for the prompt reply! To SimonM, to
Dear GHC-Users,
I am currently developing part of the EdComb library
(http://ist.unibw-muenchen.de/EdComb/).
I have compiled all files with the -prof and the -auto-all flag.
When starting the program
* without any RTS options -> everything is OK
* with +RTS -p-> everything is OK
*
Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote,
> Is this a propos of your new transformations for parallelism?
Precisely! Trying to figure out how to generate the fastest
possible array code with GHC.
Manuel
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
[EM
I can never resist messages like these, even when I'm meant
to be doing other things. It's very helpful when people offer
fairly precise performance-bug reports. Thanks!
| I am wondering whether there is a particular reason why the
| optimiser doesn't pull the
|
| (1) a = NO_CCS PArray! [wi
> I am wondering whether there is a particular reason why the
> optimiser doesn't pull the
>
> (1) a = NO_CCS PArray! [wild1 mba#];
>
> and the
>
> (2) case w of wild3 {
> I# e# ->
I checked with the before-ghci-branch compiler, and it pulls out (1) but not
(2). Simon did a fai
Questions over questions arise in my quest to understand
GHC's code generator. In this nice little piece of STG
$w$snewPArray =
NO_CCS[] \r[ww w]
case newIntArray# [ww realWorld#] of wild {
(#,#) s2# mba# ->
case -# [ww 1] of y {
DEFAULT ->
| PrelBase contains the appended code. Am I correct in
| assuming that the stuff is structured as it is, because the
| "map" rule first `breaks' the map `open', which exposes it
| to the various foldr/build rules, and if no foldr/build rule
| matches, the "mapList" rule `closes' it again in a lat
PrelBase contains the appended code. Am I correct in
assuming that the stuff is structured as it is, because the
"map" rule first `breaks' the map `open', which exposes it
to the various foldr/build rules, and if no foldr/build rule
matches, the "mapList" rule `closes' it again in a later
phase o
10 matches
Mail list logo
