nicolas.frisby at gmail.com
Thu Jul 18 20:50:23 CEST 2013
I think that would work, but I was looking for something more precise.
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Andrew Farmer <afarmer at ittc.ku.edu> wrote:
> 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.)****
>> ** **
>> ** **
>> *From:* ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces at haskell.org] *On Behalf Of *Nicolas
>> *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>
>> > 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 =
>> > 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ghc-devs