Improving efficiency and compatability of traverse implementation #221
Conversation
|
Is there a time line for merging this? I'd like it to be able to use the Traversable instance of Vector in conjunction with Compact Regions as soon as possible. Is there anything else required for this to be merged? |
|
i've been a tad backloged, i'll review it shortly
…On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 12:19 PM recursion-ninja ***@***.***> wrote:
Is there a time line for merging this? I'd like it to be able to use the
Traversable instance of Vector in conjunction with Compact Regions as soon
as possible. Is there anything else required for this to be merged?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#221 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAQwtOK5RyX4mcMOavIAsm9e6Rt7q90ks5ujMyfgaJpZM4W5EGS>
.
|
|
ok, this looks like a good fix for me, i've merged it into master, Q: do we fundamentally need the from/to lists here? I feel like there must be some clever way to do stream fusion here, though i suppose that would mess with applicative not being strict .. |
|
@cartazio I can't comment on if there is a more clever way to implement I look forward to the bug fix release, hopefully this week! |
|
@cartazio any ETA on the bug fix version being uploaded to hackage? |
|
derp, got a bit buried with some travel then being ill for a span, putting it back on top of the queue |
…oxed vectors. (gh pr #221, fixes bug #220) previously traverse used unknown size fromList rather fromListN for constructing Boxed vectors. In the presence of compact regions the implementation strategy for fromList results in program crashes. Now traverse on Boxed vectors uses the input vector size for constructing the result vector.
|
Hey, can we get a new version of |
|
I think I did that already in the most recent bug fix release of vector :)
Please double check
…On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 10:35 AM recursion-ninja ***@***.***> wrote:
Hey, can we get a new version of vector uploaded to hackage with this
improvement.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#221 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAQwg54xFtMYmxgthLIDACT49_d73zAks5u2orAgaJpZM4W5EGS>
.
|
|
Derp. I thought I did it. I’ll do it now
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM Carter Schonwald <carter.schonwald@gmail.com>
wrote:
… I think I did that already in the most recent bug fix release of vector :)
Please double check
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 10:35 AM recursion-ninja ***@***.***>
wrote:
> Hey, can we get a new version of vector uploaded to hackage with this
> improvement.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
>
>
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#221 (comment)>, or mute
> the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAQwg54xFtMYmxgthLIDACT49_d73zAks5u2orAgaJpZM4W5EGS>
> .
>
|
|
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/vector-0.12.0.2/candidate is the candidate |
|
once i get https://travis-ci.org/haskell/vector/builds/465105124 green i'll do the release |
|
released! |
This pull request is a partial fix for #220. It addresses an incompatibility defect between
vectorandghc-compact.The new
traverseimplementation is strictly more efficient and more compatible.