Newest at the top
2024-05-29 13:22:54 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | the colours aren't explained on the page, unfortunately |
2024-05-29 13:21:53 +0200 | <dminuoso> | Curious, 9.2 is yellow stable, 9.4 is green stable. |
2024-05-29 13:21:13 +0200 | BigKozlowski | (~BigKozlow@194.5.60.133) |
2024-05-29 13:18:47 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/GHC-status |
2024-05-29 13:18:38 +0200 | <haskellbridge> | <maerwald> 9.4, although discontinued by upstream, still seems more robust than 9.6 |
2024-05-29 13:17:12 +0200 | <haskellbridge> | <maerwald> Also discontinued |
2024-05-29 13:16:47 +0200 | <haskellbridge> | <maerwald> dminuoso: no, but 9.2 wasn't a great release, so spending any time on it is a waste |
2024-05-29 13:15:52 +0200 | <dminuoso> | maerwald: I might have to spent a bit of time adjusting some bounds. Do you have a specific reason to believe this would be fixed in 9.4.8? |
2024-05-29 13:11:08 +0200 | CiaoSen | (~Jura@2a05:5800:28f:ea00:e6b9:7aff:fe80:3d03) |
2024-05-29 13:09:37 +0200 | xff0x | (~xff0x@2405:6580:b080:900:e74f:f72b:d715:de1d) |
2024-05-29 13:08:16 +0200 | BigKozlowski | (~BigKozlow@194.5.60.133) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) |
2024-05-29 13:07:59 +0200 | <haskellbridge> | <maerwald> Can reproduce with 9.4.8? |
2024-05-29 13:07:30 +0200 | lortabac | (~lortabac@2a01:e0a:541:b8f0:55ab:e185:7f81:54a4) |
2024-05-29 13:04:08 +0200 | chexum | (~quassel@gateway/tor-sasl/chexum) |
2024-05-29 13:03:52 +0200 | BigKozlowski | (~BigKozlow@194.5.60.133) |
2024-05-29 13:03:47 +0200 | <dminuoso> | What could cause this? Im using cabal 3.10.2.1 together with GHC 9.2.8 |
2024-05-29 13:03:26 +0200 | chexum | (~quassel@gateway/tor-sasl/chexum) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
2024-05-29 13:03:21 +0200 | <dminuoso> | I have an unrelated question: I have a QQ, and modifications to the text inside the QQ are seemingly recompiled, but the resulting binary behaves as if the changes were not made. If I make some irrelevant whitespace change in the same file, the QQ modification makes it into the binary. |
2024-05-29 12:59:11 +0200 | BigKozlowski | (~BigKozlow@194.5.60.133) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
2024-05-29 12:54:52 +0200 | BigKozlowski | (~BigKozlow@194.5.60.133) |
2024-05-29 12:51:10 +0200 | <dminuoso> | I mean if you look at programs with optimizations enabled, you generally lose many (possible) stack frames also. |
2024-05-29 12:50:42 +0200 | sawilagar | (~sawilagar@user/sawilagar) |
2024-05-29 12:50:17 +0200 | sawilagar | (~sawilagar@user/sawilagar) (Remote host closed the connection) |
2024-05-29 12:49:51 +0200 | <dminuoso> | sm: Id argue that they are complicated in any language that does enough non-local optimizations/program transformations. |
2024-05-29 12:49:00 +0200 | danse-nr3 | (~danse-nr3@151.37.240.103) |
2024-05-29 12:48:48 +0200 | danse-nr3 | (~danse-nr3@151.57.241.101) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
2024-05-29 12:48:04 +0200 | earthy | (~arthurvl@2a02-a469-f5e2-1-83d2-ca43-57a2-dc81.fixed6.kpn.net) (Quit: WeeChat 3.8) |
2024-05-29 12:45:46 +0200 | BigKozlowski | (~BigKozlow@194.5.60.133) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) |
2024-05-29 12:39:30 +0200 | BigKozlowski | (~BigKozlow@194.5.60.133) |
2024-05-29 12:34:58 +0200 | acidjnk | (~acidjnk@p200300d6e714dc80006b1211edb0087f.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
2024-05-29 12:34:14 +0200 | chiselfuse | (~chiselfus@user/chiselfuse) |
2024-05-29 12:33:15 +0200 | chiselfuse | (~chiselfus@user/chiselfuse) (Remote host closed the connection) |
2024-05-29 12:26:44 +0200 | BigKozlowski | (~BigKozlow@194.5.60.133) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
2024-05-29 12:21:15 +0200 | BigKozlowski | (~BigKozlow@194.5.60.133) |
2024-05-29 12:19:45 +0200 | sawilagar | (~sawilagar@user/sawilagar) |
2024-05-29 12:16:17 +0200 | <haskellbridge> | <sm> call stacks are hilariously complicated in Haskell, but I think maybe we'll get there |
2024-05-29 12:16:10 +0200 | xdminsy | (~xdminsy@117.147.70.212) |
2024-05-29 12:15:42 +0200 | xdminsy | (~xdminsy@117.147.70.212) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
2024-05-29 12:15:04 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | functions are typically a little larger than in haskell, and with sufficient rearrangement of the inlined code, stacktrace quality suffers |
2024-05-29 12:14:23 +0200 | xff0x | (~xff0x@125x103x176x34.ap125.ftth.ucom.ne.jp) (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
2024-05-29 12:13:32 +0200 | <dminuoso> | I do wonder, how do other traditional languages deal with stack frames when inlining? |
2024-05-29 12:12:35 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | hah |
2024-05-29 12:12:30 +0200 | <dminuoso> | Just to find out, it didnt do anything :D |
2024-05-29 12:12:29 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | I'm just saying that even with this proposal, we're not there yet |
2024-05-29 12:12:24 +0200 | <dminuoso> | Which is why I annotated every darn function of that project with it. |
2024-05-29 12:12:16 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | oh I'm definitely not saying that this proposal is a bad idea, make it happen please |
2024-05-29 12:12:15 +0200 | <dminuoso> | For a while I did think HasCallStack did just that to IO exceptions |
2024-05-29 12:12:02 +0200 | <dminuoso> | And funnily: |
2024-05-29 12:11:44 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | true |
2024-05-29 12:11:40 +0200 | <dminuoso> | The infrastructure is there, and if it works for some programs, then great. |