Newest at the top
| 2025-11-23 21:39:16 +0100 | <geekosaur> | I think in the case where it's a partial application you might get a PAP node |
| 2025-11-23 21:39:05 +0100 | hi | gratefulgrapefru |
| 2025-11-23 21:38:55 +0100 | <[exa]> | well I guess, let's Debug.Trace and verify this |
| 2025-11-23 21:38:50 +0100 | greatfulgrapefru | hi |
| 2025-11-23 21:38:43 +0100 | <[exa]> | monochrom: yeah I thought like that |
| 2025-11-23 21:38:41 +0100 | DetourNetworkUK | (DetourNetw@user/DetourNetworkUK) DetourNetworkUK |
| 2025-11-23 21:38:36 +0100 | greatfulgrapefru | (~greatfulg@2600:387:15:6131::3) |
| 2025-11-23 21:38:20 +0100 | <monochrom> | [exa]: An example is that an unevaluated function can be an "unresolved" case like "if 1>0 then (\x -> x+1) else (\x -> x-1)" and then you force it to resolve to "(\x -> x+1)" |
| 2025-11-23 21:37:48 +0100 | <[exa]> | EvanR: there was a distinction between thunks that have all args they need and thunks that still need more (I referred to these as closures but I likely messed up the naming even more) |
| 2025-11-23 21:37:30 +0100 | Lycurgus | (~juan@user/Lycurgus) (Quit: alsoknownas.renjuan.org ( juan@acm.org )) |
| 2025-11-23 21:37:11 +0100 | <EvanR> | pointer to code, and zero or more other things |
| 2025-11-23 21:37:04 +0100 | <lambdabot> | (23,*Exception: Prelude.undefined |
| 2025-11-23 21:37:01 +0100 | <int-e> | > let a = undefined `seq` id in (23, a `seq` 42) |
| 2025-11-23 21:36:08 +0100 | <EvanR> | a closure contains what's needed to evaluate something |
| 2025-11-23 21:35:37 +0100 | <geekosaur> | the thunk should be evaluated |
| 2025-11-23 21:35:31 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) |
| 2025-11-23 21:35:14 +0100 | <[exa]> | now looking at the original STG paper they actually call everything a "closure" so even less clear :D |
| 2025-11-23 21:35:06 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Zemyla> There's a difference between a function and a thunk that evaluates to a function, though. |
| 2025-11-23 21:34:36 +0100 | <Lycurgus> | maybe STG bumped it up |
| 2025-11-23 21:34:26 +0100 | <geekosaur> | I may have overheld the shift key; not doing very well today… |
| 2025-11-23 21:34:02 +0100 | <Lycurgus> | what client are you using? or did u lose control of u? |
| 2025-11-23 21:33:48 +0100 | humasect | (~humasect@dyn-192-249-132-90.nexicom.net) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2025-11-23 21:33:25 +0100 | <geekosaur> | aiui at least |
| 2025-11-23 21:33:18 +0100 | <geekosaur> | (why did that get all caps?) |
| 2025-11-23 21:33:06 +0100 | <geekosaur> | "strict" in HASKELL means "evaluated to WHNF", and a function is already in WHNF |
| 2025-11-23 21:33:03 +0100 | Sgeo | (~Sgeo@user/sgeo) Sgeo |
| 2025-11-23 21:32:55 +0100 | <[exa]> | (with plain old STG I'd assume it's gonna make sure that the function on the heap is an actual closure instead of a thunk, does that hold nowadays with ghc?) |
| 2025-11-23 21:32:42 +0100 | DetourNetworkUK | (~DetourNet@user/DetourNetworkUK) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-11-23 21:31:29 +0100 | <[exa]> | so if I have a function (actual (->) type) and I take it as a strict or try to save it to a strict field in a datatype, what does actually happen with that at the runtime? |
| 2025-11-23 21:31:05 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-11-23 21:25:40 +0100 | trickard_ | (~trickard@cpe-87-98-47-163.wireline.com.au) |
| 2025-11-23 21:21:10 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2025-11-23 21:19:10 +0100 | trickard_ | (~trickard@cpe-87-98-47-163.wireline.com.au) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2025-11-23 21:18:14 +0100 | Frostillicus | (~Frostilli@pool-71-174-119-69.bstnma.fios.verizon.net) |
| 2025-11-23 21:16:21 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-11-23 21:14:49 +0100 | trickard_ | (~trickard@cpe-87-98-47-163.wireline.com.au) |
| 2025-11-23 21:14:35 +0100 | trickard_ | (~trickard@cpe-87-98-47-163.wireline.com.au) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2025-11-23 21:10:50 +0100 | DetourNetworkUK | (~DetourNet@user/DetourNetworkUK) DetourNetworkUK |
| 2025-11-23 21:06:06 +0100 | ljdarj | (~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) ljdarj |
| 2025-11-23 21:06:01 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 2025-11-23 21:04:32 +0100 | DetourNetworkUK | (DetourNetw@user/DetourNetworkUK) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2025-11-23 21:00:56 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-11-23 20:59:03 +0100 | Frostillicus | (~Frostilli@pool-71-174-119-69.bstnma.fios.verizon.net) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2025-11-23 20:49:43 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2025-11-23 20:49:02 +0100 | Frostillicus | (~Frostilli@pool-71-174-119-69.bstnma.fios.verizon.net) |
| 2025-11-23 20:48:08 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@172.222.148.214) peterbecich |
| 2025-11-23 20:45:34 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-11-23 20:45:10 +0100 | Lycurgus | (~juan@user/Lycurgus) Lycurgus |
| 2025-11-23 20:35:07 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 2025-11-23 20:30:04 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |