On 10 Sep, Will Partain wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> As far as I know, none of the existing implementations
>> takes the speed of Integer seriously (ghc certainly doesn't), ...
>
> The GHC implementation has always been a thin wrapper on top
> of the GMP (GNU multi-precision arit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> As far as I know, none of the existing implementations
> takes the speed of Integer seriously (ghc certainly doesn't), ...
The GHC implementation has always been a thin wrapper on top
of the GMP (GNU multi-precision arithmetic) library. So,
while we may not have
At:
http://www.cs.uu.nl/groups/ST/haskell.pdf
you may find a pdf version of the current haskell 1.4 report. You may read
and browse through it with the Acrobat redaer. Some of you might find this
more pleasing than the html version,
Doaitse Swierstra
-
I'm putting together a resource for instructors using Haskell in their
classes. Anyone teaching a course can fill out the attached form and
mail it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'll have this information
collected on Haskell.org soon.
Thanks,
John Peterson
---
Jon Fairbairn says:
On 9 Sep, John Launchbury wrote:
> When we discussed this before I appealed for someone to try it out and
> report on the results:
> * What slowdowns (?speedups) can be expected in practice using Integer
> rather than Int?
> * Do existing programs break wildly wi
MISC'99
Workshop on Applications of Interval Analysis to Systems and Control
with special emphasis on recent advances in Modal Interval Analysis
February 24-26, 1999, Universitat de Girona, Girona, Spain
Dear colleague,
Remember that the deadline for full paper submissions is SEPTEMBER 30,
19
On 9 Sep, John Launchbury wrote:
> When we discussed this before I appealed for someone to try it out and
> report on the results:
> * What slowdowns (?speedups) can be expected in practice using Integer
> rather than Int?
> * Do existing programs break wildly with this more general type, or
>
> Standard Haskell is supposed to be a conservative bugfix of 1.4,
IMHO, the use of Int is a BUG, and we should fix it in Standard Haskell,
for all of the reasons that Jon mentions.
Haven't we had this discussion (umpteen times) before?? I thought that
we had already agreed to make this change
> So I don't think either of these experiments would be helpful.
> Changing to Integer improves the design of the language and increases
> the chance that programmes will give correct results. It's not as if
> we are asking for Int to be banned!
I agree! -Paul
John Launchbury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
asked recently about the Int performance vs Integer one.
In my experience with ghc-2.10 Int was 4-5 times faster than Integer
on the tasks with large amount of integer arithmetic.
Some Haskell, Hugs implementors confirm that this is not an occasion.
Therefo
On 08-Sep-1998, Emery Berger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I personally lean towards Haskell 98 myself, but just for
> grins (and to hopefully offload this topic from the list):
> =
> STRAW POLL
> Send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject "Straw Poll".
> Results will be tabulated and announced
John Launchbury:
> I think I favor "20th century Haskell" myself :-)
I forsee legal wrangles with one R. Murdoch -- though on the plus
side, he might buy us all out for half a billion quid or so, perhaps.
[ soccer econo-political reference for those not up on the latest
NewsMegaCorp shenaniga
12 matches
Mail list logo
