On 8 November 2010 13:28, Simon Marlow <marlo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There's another approach in Jan Sparud's paper here:
>
> http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=165196
>
> although it's not clear that this interacts very well with inlining either,
> and it has a suspicious-looking side-effecting operation. It also looks
> like it creates a circular reference between the thunk and the selectors,
> which might hinder optimisations, and would probably also make things slower
> (by adding extra free variables to the thunk).
This proposal is mentioned favourably by Jörgen Gustavsson David Sands
in [1] (see section 6, case study 6). They mention that there is a
formalisation in Gustavsson's thesis [2]. That may say something about
inlining, since that's just the kind of transformation they'd want to
show is a space improvement.
[1]: Possibilities and Limitations of Call-by-Need Space Improvement (2001)
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.8.4097
[2]: Space-Safe Transformations and Usage Analysis for Call-by-Need
Languages (2001)
(which I cannot immediately find online)
Duncan
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
