<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/19/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Thomas Shackell</b> <<a href="mailto:shackell@cs.york.ac.uk">shackell@cs.york.ac.uk</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Neil Mitchell wrote:<br>> The one question you are bound to ask shortly is why we use<br>> ReversedPackedStrings, rather than PackedStrings in some cases - and<br>> the answer to that is there is no good reason. In the work if you fix
<br>> all the cases where we have Reversed strings to normal strings that<br>> would be great!<br><br>Though I can't recommend trying! Packed strings appear all over the<br>compiler, sometimes reversed, sometimes not, intermixed with code that
<br>either assumes 'reversed-ness' or doesn't. It would be seriously hard<br>work to change :-)</blockquote><div><br>Well I think I've run into this problem...maybe. All but one of the tests pass, the one that doesn't is the timeLargeArray test, and it fails with this error
<br>yhc: superclassesI InfoUsed (Id 68) [(Type class,Ord,"Data.Ix",510:8-510:10)]<br>Now my main question is how some PackedStrings can be reversed and others not when it looks like everything that uses PackedString imports it from SysDeps? The only exception I could find was compiler98/DotNet/Show.hs.
<br></div><br></div><br>