On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 01:12:39AM -0700, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
> It would be interesting to compile it with John Meacham's Jhc, which
> claims to leave very little overhead in its executables. I know the
> current Jhc has a limit on total program size, but the current HNOP at
> least may slip u
> Could you perhaps write a Haskell Weekly News entry for this? It might
> also be worth contacting Andres Löh and seeing if we can get a late
> entry into the Haskell Communities and Activities Report, this seems
> critical enough.
I agree that it is pretty critical, but I'll rather do a HNOP thi
Now we just need the Godot version, in which nothing happens twice.
Or are Godots considered harmful?
Paul.
___
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Well, we did have a serious SoC suggestion about the industrial Hello
World application, by Isaac Jones. I guess the industrial noop would
be just as good.
/Niklas
On 6/30/06, Krasimir Angelov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There was lots of suggestions for the future development of HNOP. Is
it too
There was lots of suggestions for the future development of HNOP. Is
it too late to propose Google SoC project for it? At least it will be
a good candidate for the next summer.
Cheers,
Krasimir
2006/6/30, Greg Fitzgerald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I once worked for a company at which HNOP could be u
I once worked for a company at which HNOP could be used as a drop-in replacement for half the programmers.-GregOn 6/30/06, Christophe Poucet
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I do think that refactoring this to a library would be a much better idea. That way we can see how this scales to multithreaded a
I do think that refactoring this to a library would be a much better idea. That way we can see how this scales to multithreaded applications. Will there be a HNOP 2.0 that takes advantage of such fancy features such as MPTC or FD? It would be interesting to see how this problem reduces when one
On 30/06/06, Ashley Yakeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
HNOP: Haskell No Operation
Could you perhaps write a Haskell Weekly News entry for this? It might
also be worth contacting Andres Löh and seeing if we can get a late
entry into the Haskell Communities and Activities Report, this seems
criti
On 2006-06-30, John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> hpodder homepage: http://quux.org/devel/hpodder
> documentation: http://darcs.complete.org/hpodder/doc/hpodder.pdf
> darcs repo: http://darcs.complete.org/hpoder
Err, that should have read:
http://darcs.complete.org/hpodder
___
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
mvanier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Incidentally, on my machine the compiled code is 2759360 bytes long
> unstripped
> and 1491240 stripped. One has to wonder what all those bytes are doing. I
> hope
> this doesn't sound petty; I love haskell and ghc, but 2.
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Bayley, Alistair" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Cool, that's awesome. But I don't see any Haddock docs? Or a Cabal
> Setup.hs? Would it be much trouble to add them?
Bear in mind HNOP compiles just to an executable file, so it doesn't
really have a Haskell API.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donald Bruce Stewart) wrote:
> > Cool, that's awesome. But I don't see any Haddock docs? Or a Cabal
> > Setup.hs? Would it be much trouble to add them?
>
> Done. See attached patch. :)
Applied, thanks.
--
Ashley Yakeley
Seattle WA
__
Split objects? What's that?
I'm running this on Linux (Debian unstable).
Mike
Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
mvanier:
Incidentally, on my machine the compiled code is 2759360 bytes long
unstripped and 1491240 stripped. One has to wonder what all those bytes
are doing. I hope this doesn't s
mvanier:
> Incidentally, on my machine the compiled code is 2759360 bytes long
> unstripped and 1491240 stripped. One has to wonder what all those bytes
> are doing. I hope this doesn't sound petty; I love haskell and ghc, but
> 2.8 meg for a no-op program seems a bit excessive.
Hmm. Sounds l
Incidentally, on my machine the compiled code is 2759360 bytes long unstripped
and 1491240 stripped. One has to wonder what all those bytes are doing. I hope
this doesn't sound petty; I love haskell and ghc, but 2.8 meg for a no-op
program seems a bit excessive.
I think the program could als
Alistair_Bayley:
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ashley Yakeley
> >
> > HNOP does nothing. Here's a sample session to illustrate:
> >
> > $ ./hnop
> > $
> >
> > The code is written entirely in plain Haskell 98 and makes no
> > use of FFI
> > or impure fu
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ashley Yakeley
>
> HNOP does nothing. Here's a sample session to illustrate:
>
> $ ./hnop
> $
>
> The code is written entirely in plain Haskell 98 and makes no
> use of FFI
> or impure functions. The source is available in a d
17 matches
Mail list logo
