Hi Simon.
> Issue 1: should the maximum heap size be unbounded by default?
> Currently the maximum heap size is bounded at 64M. Arguments for: this
> stops programs with a space leak eating all your swap space. Arguments
> against: it's annoying to have to raise the limit when you legitimately
Simon Marlow wrote:
>Folks,
>
>There is some disagreement over how the GC options should be specified
>for Haskell programs.
>
Something that I think would be very convenient, help alleviate some of
the problems discussed, and still very easy to implement, would be
support for setting run-time
"Julian Seward (Intl Vendor)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Hmm, we're looking at this. However, I don't really know what
> C is or is not supposed to do here. Given
>
> char fooble ( ... )
> {
>return 'z';
> }
>
> on an x86, 'z' will be returned at the lowest 8 bits in %eax.
> What I
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:22:07PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
> > I think that if there should be a default limit it would be nice to be
> > able to set it at compile time. This is something that I've wanted for
> > quite some time. If I know that the program I am compiling is
> > likely to
> > n
> On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> > Issue 1: should the maximum heap size be unbounded by default?
> > Currently the maximum heap size is bounded at 64M.
> Arguments for: this
> > stops programs with a space leak eating all your swap
> space. Arguments
> > against: it's annoying
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Simon Marlow wrote:
> Issue 1: should the maximum heap size be unbounded by default?
> Currently the maximum heap size is bounded at 64M. Arguments for: this
> stops programs with a space leak eating all your swap space. Arguments
> against: it's annoying to have to raise th
Folks,
There is some disagreement over how the GC options should be specified
for Haskell programs. I've identified a couple of issues below,
comments and opinions are greatly appreciated. If there's a concensus
that things should be changed, then I'll make the changes for the next
release.
Is
Hmm, we're looking at this. However, I don't really know what
C is or is not supposed to do here. Given
char fooble ( ... )
{
return 'z';
}
on an x86, 'z' will be returned at the lowest 8 bits in %eax.
What I don't know is, is the C compiler obliged to clear the
upper 24 bits of %eax, or d
