On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 16:05 -0400, Isaac Dupree wrote:
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
It's very difficult to get inlining right all the time. Even for a
function marked INLINE, there's really no point in inlining in some
contexts. E.g.
map f xs
(don't inline f).
Would it make
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Duncan Coutts wrote:
Also, uninlining is nigh on impossible.
I would say that's the critical problem with my notion... Why is it so
difficult? Is it because it's too easy for some minor
optimization/change to be made in the Core representation,
it.
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
| Behalf Of Duncan Coutts
| Sent: 18 April 2007 08:22
| To: GHC Users Mailing List
| Subject: {-# INLINE me_harder #-}
|
| So I'm trying to program the GHC term rewriting system again (ie the
| mighty
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
It's very difficult to get inlining right all the time. Even for a function
marked INLINE, there's really no point in inlining in some contexts. E.g.
map f xs
(don't inline f).
Would it make sense to
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 08:07:45AM -0400, Isaac Dupree wrote:
Jhc has a pragma named SUPERINLINE that just means try even harder to
inline this, I think, e.g. it has
{-# SUPERINLINE id, const, (.), ($), ($!), flip #-}
It just reminded me of the name -- I'm not sure whether it actually
makes
So I'm trying to program the GHC term rewriting system again (ie the
mighty simplifier) and it's not doing what I want it to do without me
using unnecessarily large hammers.
The crux is that I have a simple function that I want to be inlined
early so that my other rules can match on the thing it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jhc has a pragma named SUPERINLINE that just means try even harder to
inline this, I think, e.g. it has
{-# SUPERINLINE id, const, (.), ($), ($!), flip #-}
It just reminded me of the name -- I'm not sure whether it actually
makes sense to use that
