Hi, thanks for your answer. In the distributed parallel extension that we are developing, programmers are free to use immutable or mutable arrays and to transmit them between processes (the language have mechanisms to make transparent send/recv operations). Thus, it is important to give efficient marshalling for any array type. With StorableArrays, GHC offers good support, but for immutable arrays types, we have to copy element by element (worse performance). But someone can explain how unboxed arrays are stored in memory ? Heron

AFAIK, no. That's the whole point of StorableArrays. Why can't you use these instead of UArrays?

- Hal

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, heron_carvalho wrote:

...

Dear colleagues,

In GHC/FFI, is there some way (is it possible ?) t o access DIRECTLY an array of UArray type (immutable) i n a sequential contiguous memory buffer (in C side, for example) without to need to copy the array elements o ne by one ? GHC hackers and implementors are wellcome... :-) My interest is to transmit the array over a network u sing MPI, but avoiding marshalling overheads.

It is easy to do this with StorableArray's in the IO monad, of course, but I need to use UArray.

Heron de Carvalho

_____________________________________________________

...

Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela. AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis! http://antipopup.uol.com.br/

_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow- haskell-users

-- Hal Daume III | hdau me@isi.edu "Arrest this man, he talks in maths." | www. isi.edu/~hdaume

_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow- haskell-users

__________________________________________________________________________ Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela. AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis! http://antipopup.uol.com.br/