Simon Marlow wrote:
Michael Marte wrote:
Now I get the following error:
GHC/PrimopWrappers.hs:565:20: Not in scope: `GHC.Prim.forkOn#'
I think this problem may be releated to the other changes I pulled.
You probably need to rebuild some stuff. If your stage 1 compiler is
up to date, the
On Wednesday 29 March 2006 01:35, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
> primitives work with just the same internal structures. i thinl that
> only real advantage of adding primop instead of adding FFI import is
> that PrimOps.cmm contains already implemented wrappers for calling GMP
> functions while for FFI y
Benjamin Franksen wrote:
[snip]
Thus, GHC does nothing wrong, according to the addendum. That doesn't
mean allowing IO-equivalent newtypes wouldn't be a good idea. It is
just not written in the addendum.
Apologies for not reading the addendum properly and slighting the good
character of GHC...
On Thursday 30 March 2006 14:13, Brian Hulley wrote:
> John Meacham wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 03:50:06AM +0100, Brian Hulley wrote:
> >> where the intention is that the callback will take the width and
> >> height of the window and return a RenderM action, the problem is
> >> that because
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello Thorkil,
Wednesday, March 29, 2006, 2:15:05 AM, you wrote:
Thorkil, i can't understand why you can't just use FFI to import
functions you required? why you need to patch the PrimOps list?
As I wrote earlier, using FFI is also a candidate for getting access to
ad
