vectorisation code?

[RodLogic]

(disclaimer: I know nothing about the vectorization code)

Now, is the vectorization code really dead code or it is code that needs
love to come back to life? By removing it from the code base, you are
probably sealing it's fate as dead code as we are limiting new or existing
contributors to act on it (even if it's a commit hash away). If it is code
that needs love to come back to life, grep noise or conditional compilation
is a small price to pay here, imho.

As a compromise, is it possible to move vectorization code into it's own
submodule in git or is it too intertwined with core GHC? So that it can be
worked on independent of GHC?


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvriedel at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 2015-01-20 at 09:37:25 +0100, Jan Stolarek wrote:
> >> Here's an alternate suggestion: in SimplCore, keep the call to vectorise
> >> around, but commented out
>
> > Yuck. Carter and Brandon are right here - we have git, let it do the
> > job. I propose that we remove vectorization code, create a Trac ticket
> > about vectorization & DPH needing love and record the commit hash in
> > the ticket so that we can revert it easily in the future.
>
> I'm also against commenting out dead code in the presence of a VCS.
>
> Btw, here's two links discussing the issues related to commenting out if
> anyone's interested in knowing more:
>
>  -
> http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/190096/can-commented-out-code-be-valuable-documentation
>
>  -
> http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/45378/is-commented-out-code-really-always-bad
>
>
> Cheers,
>   hvr
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150120/d0e73761/attachment.html>