On 21/05/2009 00:38, Ian Lynagh wrote:
Hi all,
Unfortunately, since the release of 6.10.3, still more problems have
come to light in the 6.10 branch. We are therefore planning to do a
6.10.4 release.
For 6.10.4, we will only consider fixes for serious bugs that cannot be
easily worked around.
Ok, I went with the preprocessor solution only. It is simple, stupid and
works well enough ... and template haskell alternative needs it anyway
not to be too unportable.
Both template haskell alternatives reported Pattern match(es) are
non-exhaustive of their own. The second alternative
Do you really want exhaustiveness, or is what you actually want safety?
I want both. Exhaustiveness checking now and forever, because it's a
modular property. Safety when somebody gets around to implementing
whole-program analysis in the compiler I use, when I feel like waiting
around
Catch already does assertion checking (1). Its runtime on moderate to
small programs (HsColour in particular) is far less than the time GHC
takes to compile them, and I still have no idea what its runtime is on
enormous programs (2). An analysis can be whole program and can be
slow, one does
Catch already does assertion checking (1). Its runtime on moderate to
small programs (HsColour in particular) is far less than the time GHC
takes to compile them, and I still have no idea what its runtime is on
enormous programs (2). An analysis can be whole program and can be
slow, one does
ndmitchell:
Catch already does assertion checking (1). Its runtime on moderate to
small programs (HsColour in particular) is far less than the time GHC
takes to compile them, and I still have no idea what its runtime is on
enormous programs (2). An analysis can be whole program and can be
If Catch says your program will not crash, then it will not crash. I
even gave an argument for correctness in the final appendix of my
thesis http://community.haskell.org/~ndm/thesis/ (pages 175-207). Of
course, there are engineering concerns (perhaps your Haskell compiler
will mis-translate
ndmitchell:
If Catch says your program will not crash, then it will not crash. I
even gave an argument for correctness in the final appendix of my
thesis http://community.haskell.org/~ndm/thesis/ (pages 175-207). Of
course, there are engineering concerns (perhaps your Haskell compiler
OK. i'm just trying to get an intuition for the analysis.
Catch is defined by a small Haskell program. You can write a small
Haskell evaluation for a Core language. The idea is to write the
QuickCheck style property, then proceed using Haskell style proof
steps. The checker is recursive - it
ndmitchell:
OK. i'm just trying to get an intuition for the analysis.
Catch is defined by a small Haskell program. You can write a small
Haskell evaluation for a Core language. The idea is to write the
QuickCheck style property, then proceed using Haskell style proof
steps. The checker is
10 matches
Mail list logo
