[Haskell-cafe] why these two are not equivalent?

[Diego Souza]

On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 09:57:50PM -0700, Iavor Diatchki wrote:
> (argh, sorry about that, I pressed something and gmail sent my
> unfinished email!)
> 
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Iavor Diatchki
> <iavor.diatchki at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > It seems that the problem is the site is using GHC 6.6.1, and
> > something was broken at the time (I have not looked into what that
> > is).
> > Here are the outputs that I get for the little example on the site
> > that you posted:
> >
> > GHC 6.10.3 and C++:
> 
> 03 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0141  1
> 03 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0142  1
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0141  2
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0142  2
> 
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0142  1
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0143  1
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0144  1
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0145  1
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0146  1
> 
> With GHC 6.6.1:
> 03 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0141  1
> 03 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0142  1
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0141  2
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0142  2
> 
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0142  1
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0143  1
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0145  1
> 30 10103538 2222 1233 6160 0146  1
> 
> Note that in the second test case one line is missing, the one ending in 44.
> 
> -Iavor

Hi Iavor,

Sweet, it makes a lot of sense. I haven't tried to run this with
ghc-6.6.1, though. Thank you for doing this. Just for curiosity I'll try
to find out what exactly fails under 6.6.1, just in case anyone else run
into the problem in future (as I don't think they will upgrade the ghc
any time soon).

I'll eventually ask them to upgrade the ghc version. Any recommendation
about which version should I ask for?

Thanks,
-- 
~dsouza
yahoo!im: paravinicius
gpg key fingerprint: 71B8 CE21 3A6E F894 5B1B  9ECE F88E 067F E891 651E