defunctionalization

[Andrew Farmer]

What happens when you put NOINLINE on the function and compile with
-fexpose-all-unfoldings? Does that get the behavior you want?


On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:20 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
<simonpj at microsoft.com>wrote:

>  It seems a little weird, but the internal data types can express it, so
> if you can make the front end do the right thing I’d be happy to take it.
> (Don’t forget the manual.)****
>
> ** **
>
> SImon****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces at haskell.org] *On Behalf Of *Nicolas
> Frisby
> *Sent:* 16 July 2013 21:29
> *To:* ghc-devs at haskell.org
> *Subject:* Re: defunctionalization****
>
> ** **
>
> Ah, I misread that TidyPgm function.It looks like if I build the
> CoreUnfolding, GHC will respect it. It's just rejecting the pragma
> combination in HsSyn.****
>
> On Jul 16, 2013 3:22 PM, "Nicolas Frisby" <nicolas.frisby at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to put a NOINLINE and an INLINABLE pragma on a binding.
> >
> > (I'm sketching a defunctionalization pass. I'd like the 'apply` routine
> RHS to make it into the interface file, but I do not want it to be inlined,
> since that'd undo the defunctionalization.)
> >
> > In other words, I'd like a CoreUnfolding value with the uf_guidance =
> UnfNever.
> >
> > It seems TidyPgm.addExternal ignores such a core unfolding.
> >
> > Would GHC consider a patch to make this work?
> >
> > Thanks.****
>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20130718/9556211a/attachment.htm>