derek.a.elkins:
> On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 19:30 -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
> > > I offer up the following example:
> > >
> > > mean xs = sum xs / length xs
> > >
> > > Now try, say, "mean [1.. 1e9]", and watch GHC eat several GB of RAM. (!!)
> >
> > But you know why, don't you?
> >
> > > sat down
On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 19:30 -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
> > I offer up the following example:
> >
> > mean xs = sum xs / length xs
> >
> > Now try, say, "mean [1.. 1e9]", and watch GHC eat several GB of RAM. (!!)
>
> But you know why, don't you?
>
> > sat down and spent the best part of a day wri
On 2008 May 14, at 14:23, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Neil Mitchell wrote:
1. What is "ghc-core"?
You actually answer this question as part of question 2. Think of it
as simple Haskell with some additional bits.
I rephrase: I know what GHC's Core language is. But Dons said "I
suggest you insta
Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
On 14 May 2008, at 8:58 am, Andrew Coppin wrote:
What I'm trying to say [and saying very badly] is that Haskell is an
almost terrifyingly subtle language.
Name me a useful programming language that isn't.
Simply interchanging two for-loops, from
for (i = 0; i < N
Neil Mitchell wrote:
Hi
1. What is "ghc-core"?
You actually answer this question as part of question 2. Think of it
as simple Haskell with some additional bits.
I rephrase: I know what GHC's Core language is. But Dons said "I suggest
you install ghc-core", which suggests the ex
Don Stewart wrote:
ndmitchell:
2. Does anybody know how to actually read GHC's Core output anyway?
There is one different from standard Haskell I am aware of. In Core,
case x of _ -> 1 will evaluate x, in Haskell it won't. Other than
that, its just Haskell, but without pattern matchi
On 14 May 2008, at 8:58 am, Andrew Coppin wrote:
What I'm trying to say [and saying very badly] is that Haskell is an
almost terrifyingly subtle language.
Name me a useful programming language that isn't.
Simply interchanging two for-loops, from
for (i = 0; i < N; i++) for (j = 0; j <
Andrew Coppin wrote:
2. Does anybody know how to actually read GHC's Core output anyway? To
me, it looks almost exactly like very, very complicated Haskell source
with a suspicious concentration of case expressions - but I understand
that in the Core language, many constructs actually mean some
ndmitchell:
> Hi
>
> > 1. What is "ghc-core"?
>
> You actually answer this question as part of question 2. Think of it
> as simple Haskell with some additional bits.
>
> > 2. Does anybody know how to actually read GHC's Core output anyway?
> > To me,
> > it looks almost exactly like very, very
Hi
> 1. What is "ghc-core"?
You actually answer this question as part of question 2. Think of it
as simple Haskell with some additional bits.
> 2. Does anybody know how to actually read GHC's Core output anyway?
> To me,
> it looks almost exactly like very, very complicated Haskell source with
Andrew Coppin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're probably right about all that. I would humbly suggest that
> what is somewhat lacking is a good, introductory, high-level text on
> what makes Haskell go fast and what makes it go slow. As with many
> things in the Haskell world, there are bits and
Don Stewart wrote:
Now try, say, "mean [1.. 1e9]", and watch GHC eat several GB of RAM. (!!)
But you know why, don't you?
What I'm trying to say [and saying very badly] is that Haskell is an
almost terrifyingly subtle language. Seemingly insignificant chages can
have drastic consequ
Achim Schneider wrote:
To get a bit more on-topic: I currently completely fail to implement a
layout rule in Parsec because I don't understand its inner workings,
and thus constantly mess up my state. Parsec's ease of usage is
deceiving as soon as you use more than combinators: Suddenly the
plumb
"Darrin Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 2:20 AM, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Note the use of strict pairs. Key to ensuring the accumulators
> > end up in registers.The performance difference here is due to
> > fold (and all left folds) not fusing
> I offer up the following example:
>
> mean xs = sum xs / length xs
>
> Now try, say, "mean [1.. 1e9]", and watch GHC eat several GB of RAM. (!!)
But you know why, don't you?
> sat down and spent the best part of a day writing an MD5
> implementation. Eventually I got it so that all the test
15 matches
Mail list logo
