On 23 March 2006 02:24, Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote: > Bulat Ziganshin wrote: >> Taral wrote: >>> I don't see that more optimization follows from the availability >>> of information regarding the strictness of a function result's >>> subcomponents. >> >> ghc uses unboxed tuples just for such sort of optimizations. instead >> of returning possibly-unevaluated pair with possibly-unevaluated >> elements it just return, say, two doubles in registers - a huge win > > Mmm, not quite. Unboxed tuples are boxed tuples restricted such that > they never have to be stored on the heap, but this has no effect on > semantics at all. A function returning (# Double,Double #) may still > return two thunks.
Yes, this is why the unboxed 1-tuple makes sense :-) indexArray# :: Array# a -> Int# -> (# a #) Cheers, Simon _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime