Re[2]: returning to cost of Integer

2006-08-02 Thread Bulat Ziganshin
Hello John, Thursday, August 3, 2006, 1:25:45 AM, you wrote: evaluated. If the contents of the constructor itself can be packed into the other 30 bits, then there's no need for a pointer at all. For enumerated types, you can use all 31 bits for the tag, since only 1 bit is required to

Re: Re[2]: returning to cost of Integer

2006-08-02 Thread Neil Mitchell
Hi (i know about Haskell standard, but how many programs relies on 32-bit Ints?) The standard demands the range [-2^29 .. 2^29 - 1] You don't have a problem, some were reserved for you already. Thanks Neil ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list

Re[2]: returning to cost of Integer

2006-08-01 Thread Bulat Ziganshin
Hello John, Tuesday, August 1, 2006, 5:19:37 AM, you wrote: This has made me wonder whether we are better off getting rid of the small integer optimization and turning Integer into a straight unboxable ForeignPtr to a GMP number. this would also mean we could use the standard GMP that comes