Thank you for the explanation, I think I pretty much understand what's going on now. Indeed, nothing went wrong, it was just that I thought that the flag -fexpose-all-unfoldings would indeed put _all_ unfoldings in the interface file: even unfoldings that are bottom values. For my use-case, I can just compile the file with -fno-strictness so that this top-level bottom value is never created in the first instance.
Here are the -dverbose-core2core files: Compiled with no additional / default flags: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/christiaanb/clash-prelude/gh-pages/noflags.core Compiled with -fexpose-all-unfoldings: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/christiaanb/clash-prelude/gh-pages/allunfoldings.core Compiled with -fexpose-all-unfoldings -fno-strictness: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/christiaanb/clash-prelude/gh-pages/allunfoldings_nostrictness.core -- Christiaan On Apr 1, 2014, at 1:11 PM, Simon Peyton Jones <simo...@microsoft.com> wrote: > These "absent" thunks appear when the strictness analyser works out that a > function does not use an argument at all. Suppose 'f' does not use its first > argument. Then a call > f (...big expression...) > will be replaced with > f (absentError "blah") > > Such thunks almost invariably turn out to be dead code in the end, and are > discarded. It's very unusual for them to survive to the end of compilation, > let alone as a top-level value. But it's not impossible. > > Just for curiosity, can you compile with -dverbose-core2core, and leave the > results somewhere I can see them? > > In short, it doesn't look as if there is anything wrong. If there's a good > reason you want to see the unfolding anyway, that's not impossible, but at > least you understand what is happening now. > > Simon _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
