6.8.1 compilation error
simonmarhaskell at gmail.com
Tue Nov 6 04:00:57 EST 2007
Seth Kurtzberg wrote:
> At this point I don't believe the problem that I reported is related to ghc,
> although I'm repeating things to bolster that conclusion.
> (As an aside, except for memory testing, the manufacturing test suite for
> the product I'm about to discuss is written in Haskell with just a handful
> of situations that required using the FFI to call C++ or C functions.)
> I've done memory hardware testing in manufacturing situations, and until
> quite recently I would have agreed with your characterization of memory
> testing programs. (I understand your comment was not intended to be 100%
> serious, but I think it's worth answering regardless.)
> We, of course, keep statistics about the accuracy of the manufacturing line
> testing. With the most recent version of memtest86, we've found the rate of
> false negatives to have declined dramatically, and is now in the area of
> 1-2%. The increased accuracy, of course, has a cost; on the current
> platform a single testing round takes almost four hours, and I consider
> three rounds to be the minimum required for thorough testing.
Interesting... I might actually use memtest86 now, thanks!
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users