GHC 8.10 backports?

Gergő Érdi gergo at
Mon Mar 22 05:57:47 UTC 2021

Thanks, that makes it less appealing. In the original thread, I got no
further replies after my email announcing my "discovery" of that commit, so
I thought that was the whole story.

On Mon, Mar 22, 2021, 13:53 Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane at> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 12:39:28PM +0800, Gergő Érdi wrote:
> > I'd love to have this in a GHC 8.10 release:
> >
> This is already in 9.0, 9.2 and master, but it is a rather non-trivial
> change, given all the new work that went into the String case.  So I am
> not sure it is small/simple enough to make for a compelling backport.
> There's a lot of recent activity in this space.  See also
> <>, which is not
> yet merged into master, and might still be eta-reduced one more step).
> I don't know whether such optimisation tweaks (not a bugfix) are in
> scope for backporting, we certainly need to be confident they'll not
> cause any new problems.  FWIW, 5259 is dramatically simpler...
> Of course we also have
> <> in much the
> same territory, but there we're still blocked on someone figuring out
> what's going on with the 20% compile-time hit with T13056, and whether
> that's acceptable or not...
> --
>     Viktor.
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list