org] On Behalf Of Ryan
> Trinkle
> Sent: 28 October 2016 00:06
> To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
> Subject: Specialization plugin
>
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> I'm trying my hand at writing a GHC plugin to generate specializations for
> all uses of a particular typeclass,
My understanding was that they ought to be the same. However, that didn't
seem to be the case. In my small example, where the plugin did work,
-fexpose-all-unfoldings did not.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Christiaan Baaij <
christiaan.ba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One small question: what's
One small question: what's the difference between adding INLINABLE
everywhere, and just compiling with -fexpose-all-unfoldings,
https://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/latest/docs/html/users_guide/using-optimisation.html#ghc-flag--fexpose-all-unfoldings?
Is there any reason you couldn't use that flag
NLINABLE first. After all if there’s a
> bug there, fixing it will benefit everyone.
>
>
>
> SImon
>
>
>
> *From:* ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] *On Behalf Of *Ryan
> Trinkle
> *Sent:* 28 October 2016 00:06
> *To:* ghc-devs@haskell.org
> *Subject:* Sp
2016 00:06
To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
Subject: Specialization plugin
Hi everyone,
I'm trying my hand at writing a GHC plugin to generate specializations for all
uses of a particular typeclass, and I've run into some trouble. I'd appreciate
it if someone could point me in the right direction! I'm
Hi everyone,
I'm trying my hand at writing a GHC plugin to generate specializations for
all uses of a particular typeclass, and I've run into some trouble. I'd
appreciate it if someone could point me in the right direction! I'm new to
GHC development, so I may just be overlooking some simple
