Validates failures on Mac OS X AND Linux
marlowsd at gmail.com
Tue Nov 3 08:10:52 EST 2009
On 03/11/2009 13:04, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> | Can I remind people that T1969 is there for a good reason: when it
> | wobbles, it may indicate a performance regression. We should keep the
> | boundaries updated so that people don't just ignore it as a matter of
> | course.
> | I realise it's difficult to keep it updated because it has to be done on
> | multiple platforms. But at the very least if your patch makes it fail,
> | you should update the values for *your* platform (after checking that
> | you haven't really introduced a performance regression).
> OK... but then can T1969.hs please contain a comment that explains what to look for, and what to alter to change the bound? It's all a bit cryptic.
Look in space_leaks/all.T. I think it's pretty self-explanatory, but
shout if that's not the case for you.
More information about the Cvs-ghc