On 7/12/07, Dan Weston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now that I mention it, the base case is much less often called than the
recursive case, so I would in hindsight flip the order of the two
(mutually exclusive) partial function definitions:
unique :: Eq a => [a] -> [a]
unique (x:xs) = x : (unique . filter (/= x) $ xs)
unique [] = []
This should be marginally more efficient. I doubt that GHC would
automatically detect that a) they are mutually exclusive and b) the
second is called less often than the first!
Of course GHC detects that the cases are mutually exclusive. The code
above desugars into a single definition of unique with a case
expression on its argument. In Core, case expressions have at most one
alternative for each data constructor of the type of the scrutinee,
and since each alternative corresponds to a different top-level data
constructor, alternatives are mutually exclusive. As for point (b), it
hardly matters, since GHC will rearrange case alternatives at will
(and I don't think the order of alternatives has any operational
meaning anyway.)
If you want to see this for yourself, try running GHC with the
-ddump-simpl flag on a simple example (like the one above).
Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Chevalier* catamorphism.org *Often in error, never in doubt
"What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger -- or puts you on a talk
show." --Carrie Fisher
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
