Re: Error building ghc on raspberry pi.

2013-01-02 Thread roconnor
Some further information it seems that llc is segfaulting: pi@raspberrypi /tmp/ghc-7.4.1 $ llc -O3 -relocation-model=static /tmp/ghc7189_0/ghc7189_0.bc -o /tmp/ghc7189_0/ghc7189_0.lm_s Stack dump: 0. Program arguments: llc -O3 -relocation-model=static /tmp/ghc7189_0/ghc7189_0.bc -o /tmp/ghc

Re: Error building ghc on raspberry pi.

2013-01-02 Thread roconnor
Thanks for your help, but unfortunately this isn't the issue Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 924G 584G 294G 67% /tmp So there is pleanty of room on temp. BTW, I also tried building it twice and I got the same error at the same place. On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Je

Re: Error building ghc on raspberry pi.

2013-01-02 Thread Jeremy Shaw
My random guess is that /tmp is mounted using tmpfs (aka a RAM drive) and it got full. Try remounting /tmp to use the sdcard instead ? On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:32 PM, wrote: > I'm trying to build ghc-7.4.1 using ghc-7.4.1 on my raspberry pi (armv6l) > and I get the following error: > > "inplace/

Error building ghc on raspberry pi.

2013-01-02 Thread roconnor
I'm trying to build ghc-7.4.1 using ghc-7.4.1 on my raspberry pi (armv6l) and I get the following error: "inplace/bin/ghc-stage1" -H32m -O-package-name ghc-prim-0.2.0.0 -hide-all-packages -i -ilibraries/ghc-prim/. -ilibraries/ghc-prim/dist-install/build -ilibraries/ghc-prim/dist-install/

RE: DoCon and GHC

2013-01-02 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
I made a second mistake. I meant (LinSolvRing (UPol k)). Apologies. | > I don't know why 7.4 accepts it, but I'm not inclined to investigate... | > looks like a bug in 7.4. | | ghc-7.4.1 may use a special trick, but is correct. I don't understand your explanation. What is wrong with this r

Re: DoCon and GHC

2013-01-02 Thread Serge D. Mechveliani
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 08:23:37PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: > | > The solution is to add (EuclideanRing k) to the type sig of cubicExt. > | > Then it compiles all the way up to the top. > | > | But the DoCon declares > |class (EuclideanRing a, FactorizationRing a) => Fi

Re: Fundeps and type equality

2013-01-02 Thread Martin Sulzmann
I agree with Iavor that it is fairly straight-forward to extend FC to support FD-style type improvement. In fact, I've formalized such a proof language in a PPDP'06 paper: "Extracting programs from type class proofs" (type improvement comes only at the end) Similar to FC, coercions (proof terms) a

RE: DoCon and GHC

2013-01-02 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
| > The solution is to add (EuclideanRing k) to the type sig of cubicExt. | > Then it compiles all the way up to the top. | | But the DoCon declares |class (EuclideanRing a, FactorizationRing a) => Field a | | (EuclideanRing is a superclass for Field), | and the test decl

Re: DoCon and GHC

2013-01-02 Thread Serge D. Mechveliani
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 05:21:43PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: > Serge > > That's odd. I've tried with both 7.6 and HEAD, and both fail on T_cubeext > thus: > T_cubeext.hs:102:10: > Overlapping instances for LinSolvRing (UPol k) > arising from a use of `upEucRing' > Matching in

Re: [Haskell-cafe] [Haskell-beginners] ghc and android

2013-01-02 Thread Karel Gardas
Hello, rather than native GHC run on top of Android, I would recommend to have a look at GHC HEAD and attempt to cross-compile to Android. On ghc-cvs@ mailing list I've seen some work done for cross-compiling to QNX/BlackBerry OS 10 so I think Androind should be also doable with some work...

Re: [Haskell-cafe] [Haskell-beginners] ghc and android

2013-01-02 Thread Bernhard Urban
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote: > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Bernhard Urban wrote: >> >> The main issue: The GHC runtime relies on glibc > > > I have to assume this is not meant literally, because ghc works on OS X and > *BSD. Right. I was talking about the situation

RE: Fundeps and type equality

2013-01-02 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
As far as I understand, the reason that GHC does not construct such proofs is that it can't express them in its internal proof language (System FC). Iavor is quite right It seems to me that it should be fairly straight-forward to extend FC to support this sort of proof, but I have not been able