Newest at the top
| 2024-10-07 04:20:29 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-10-07 04:18:38 +0200 | tcard | (~tcard@2400:4051:5801:7500:cf17:befc:ff82:5303) tcard |
| 2024-10-07 04:18:22 +0200 | tcard | (~tcard@2400:4051:5801:7500:cf17:befc:ff82:5303) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-10-07 04:16:24 +0200 | morb | (~morb@pool-108-41-100-120.nycmny.fios.verizon.net) |
| 2024-10-07 04:15:54 +0200 | ethantwardy | (user@user/ethantwardy) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 04:15:52 +0200 | td_ | (~td@i5387091A.versanet.de) td_ |
| 2024-10-07 04:13:52 +0200 | td_ | (~td@i5387093A.versanet.de) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 04:09:54 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 04:09:12 +0200 | Inst | (~Inst@user/Inst) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 04:04:45 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-10-07 04:04:36 +0200 | identity | (~identity@user/ZharMeny) (Quit: ERC 5.6.0.30.1 (IRC client for GNU Emacs 30.0.60)) |
| 2024-10-07 04:03:25 +0200 | Inst | (~Inst@user/Inst) Inst |
| 2024-10-07 03:54:10 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 03:53:47 +0200 | qhong | (~qhong@DN200outg.stanford.edu) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-10-07 03:53:31 +0200 | ethantwardy | (user@user/ethantwardy) ethantwardy |
| 2024-10-07 03:52:18 +0200 | ethantwardy | (user@user/ethantwardy) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 03:49:19 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-10-07 03:47:53 +0200 | morb | (~morb@pool-108-41-100-120.nycmny.fios.verizon.net) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 03:46:56 +0200 | <monochrom> | (Probably part of why the benchmarks had to change every year.) |
| 2024-10-07 03:45:47 +0200 | <monochrom> | Not to mention that in the 1980s commercial compilers recognized popular benchmarking code and cheated. |
| 2024-10-07 03:44:55 +0200 | athan | (~athan@syn-098-153-145-140.biz.spectrum.com) (Quit: Konversation terminated!) |
| 2024-10-07 03:43:14 +0200 | morb | (~morb@pool-108-41-100-120.nycmny.fios.verizon.net) |
| 2024-10-07 03:41:58 +0200 | <monochrom> | As Dennis Ritchie pointed out half a century ago, library source code means nothing if the compiler contains code to overrule it. |
| 2024-10-07 03:39:01 +0200 | xff0x | (~xff0x@fsb6a9491c.tkyc517.ap.nuro.jp) |
| 2024-10-07 03:38:18 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 03:37:45 +0200 | <EvanR> | of writing a bunch of asm |
| 2024-10-07 03:37:41 +0200 | <EvanR> | and if it can, and will rewrite it all, what was the point |
| 2024-10-07 03:36:50 +0200 | <EvanR> | it's harder for the compiler to know another sequence of asm computes the same high level values |
| 2024-10-07 03:36:19 +0200 | <EvanR> | if the library was implemented in stuff that is eventually implemented in "haskell looking" assembly language, that would probably make optimizations harder. Because we only care about the high level semantics, not the exact sequence of instructions used |
| 2024-10-07 03:33:54 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-10-07 03:25:06 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 03:23:24 +0200 | Tuplanolla | (~Tuplanoll@91-159-69-59.elisa-laajakaista.fi) (Quit: Leaving.) |
| 2024-10-07 03:20:21 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-10-07 03:15:56 +0200 | ethantwardy | (user@user/ethantwardy) ethantwardy |
| 2024-10-07 03:09:20 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 03:07:13 +0200 | <geekosaur> | the ones that aren;t that are mostly cmm code |
| 2024-10-07 03:07:02 +0200 | <geekosaur> | (the answer is: `+#` and the backend emits the actual instruction) |
| 2024-10-07 03:06:45 +0200 | spew | (~spew@201.141.99.170) spew |
| 2024-10-07 03:06:37 +0200 | <geekosaur> | how exactly do you write the platform's add instruction in haskell code? |
| 2024-10-07 03:04:57 +0200 | weary-traveler | (~user@user/user363627) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-10-07 03:04:49 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-10-07 03:03:16 +0200 | <yin> | hits the magic way too soon |
| 2024-10-07 03:02:11 +0200 | fmira | (~user@user/fmira) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 03:02:10 +0200 | <yin> | i wish all code was haskell all the way down to binary |
| 2024-10-07 03:01:10 +0200 | <yin> | ok great, thanks |
| 2024-10-07 03:01:09 +0200 | <geekosaur> | necessarily |
| 2024-10-07 03:00:58 +0200 | <geekosaur> | the actual definitions are baked into the compiler or backend |
| 2024-10-07 03:00:46 +0200 | <geekosaur> | everything in ghc-prim is "defined as itself", yes. it's just for documentation |
| 2024-10-07 02:59:33 +0200 | ethantwardy | (user@user/ethantwardy) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 2024-10-07 02:59:24 +0200 | <yin> | is it just "magic" and we need the definition for the type signature? |