cons/build and making rules look boring

[Joachim Breitner]

Dear Sven,

glad to you are making progress!

Am Samstag, den 30.08.2014, 18:05 -0400 schrieb David Feuer:
> I think I may have figured out at least part of the reason that
> cons/build gives bad results. I actually ran into a clue when working
> on scanl. It seems at least part of the problem is that a rule like
> 
> x : build g = build (\c n -> c x (g c n))
> 
> makes (:) look "interesting" to the inliner.

I think that by now your know more about rules and the inliner than the
average reader of ghc-devs, and not all of us know what it means if
something is interesting to the inliner. So mostly out of curiosity:
What happens with interesting things, and why is it bad for (:)?


Greetings,
Joachim

-- 
Joachim “nomeata” Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.de • http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
  Jabber: nomeata at joachim-breitner.de  • GPG-Key: 0xF0FBF51F
  Debian Developer: nomeata at debian.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20140831/ae6ce8be/attachment.sig>