Hi!
I'm trying to get (more) profiling data out of a program compiled with
GHC. Here is a link to a thread with the problem description in
haskell-cafe:
http://www.nabble.com/-Fwd:-profiling-in-haskell--td19383536.html
Thank you!
--
Vlad Skvortsov, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://vss.73rus.com
___
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 4:18 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If you can suggest improvements to the manual I'm all ears. Notably, it says
> nothing about what "rigid" means or how it propagates.
A good solid definition of rigid would be nice. You pointed me at a
paper on w
> Ah -- you used an *existential* there! Yes,
> existentially-bound type variables are rigid. They stand for
> themselves, as it were.
> How should this be clarified?
I'd leave it. I wanted a simple set of rules stating "_if_ you provide
the following type signatures your code _will_ compile"
Hi,
I want to build GHC HEAD with the time package. I figured out how to do
it by editing packages and removing the word extralibs, but that doesn't
seem to be the correct way.
I suspected I might be able to get time included by giving some
incantation to ./darcs-all, but I couldn't figure out wh
Hi,
I've install HsSVN (version 0.3.3) using ghc-6.8.3 and Cabal-1.4.0.1,
but it was a real pain (under i686 Linux 2.6.22.18-0.2-default #1 SMP)
1. I had to install subversion-devel-1.4.4-30 (of course)
2. configure went through after setting:
export CPATH=/usr/include/apr-1:/usr/include/subversi
[sent to list as well this time]
On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 14:00 +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> Ah -- you used an *existential* there! Yes, existentially-bound type
> variables are rigid. They stand for themselves, as it were.
>
> That resolves the mystery -- but it existentials admittedly int
Ah -- you used an *existential* there! Yes, existentially-bound type variables
are rigid. They stand for themselves, as it were.
That resolves the mystery -- but it existentials admittedly introduce a new
complication
How should this be clarified?
S
| -Original Message-
| From: Mitc
> | > | (case undefined of Foo GadtValue -> ()) :: () -- is rigid
> ...
> |
> | But the first compiles fine, so it seems that the scrutinee doesn't
> | have to always be rigid?
>
> Not for me! Either with 6.8.3 or HEAD. What compiler are you using?
HEAD from last Thursday. The code I'm using is
Hi Simon,
> | op (Foo GadtValue :: Foo) = () :: ()
>
> The thing is that GHC doesn't know the result type of the
> match *at the match point*. Suppose you had written
>
> op (Foo GadtValue :: Foo) = id (() :: ()) or
> op (Foo GadtValue :: Foo) = if blah then () :: () else () or
On Sunday 14 September 2008 20:27:52 Mariusz Przygodzki wrote:
> Maybe "they" were waiting so many years because "they" have never
> asked users about what users really need and think about it.
What?
> "It's not that we hate you (unless we do). It's just that we have
> nothing to offer you, and y
10 matches
Mail list logo
