Hi,
Am Dienstag, den 18.07.2017, 08:34 -0700 schrieb Conal Elliott:
> I'm seeing what looks like repeated computation under a lambda with
> `-O` and `-O2`. The following definition:
>
> > exampleC :: Double -> Double -> Double
> > exampleC = \ t -> let s = sin t in \ x -> x + s
>
> yields this Core:
>
> > -- RHS size: {terms: 13, types: 6, coercions: 0}
> > exampleC :: Double -> Double -> Double
> > exampleC =
> > \ (t_afI6 :: Double) (eta_B1 :: Double) ->
> > case eta_B1 of _ { D# x_aj5c ->
> > case t_afI6 of _ { D# x1_aj5l ->
> > D# (+## x_aj5c (sinDouble# x1_aj5l))
> > }
> > }
ghc -O -dverbose-core2core shows you that the problem is this phase:
==================== Simplifier ====================
Max iterations = 4
SimplMode {Phase = 2 [main],
inline,
rules,
eta-expand,
case-of-case}
It does not happen with -fno-do-lambda-eta-expansion (but you’d lose in
other parts.)
> I'm concerned because many of my uses of such functions involve
> computations dependent only on `t` (time) but with millions of uses
> (space) per `t`. (I'm working on a GHC Core plugin (compiling to
> categories), with one use generating graphics GPU code.)
Did you measure whether this really is a problem? The benefits of not
dealing with dynamically allocated functions might outweigh the cost of
recalculating sin.
Greetings,
Joachim
--
Joachim Breitner
m...@joachim-breitner.de
http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
