[ghc-steering-committee] Recommendation: reject #367 (was: Re: Please review #367: Clarify primops using unboxed sums, Shepherd: Simon Marlow)

[Spiwack, Arnaud]

I don't have an informed opinion. I'll trust Simon. It may very well be a
case of “it would have been the right thing to do were we to start from
scratch today, but it is now too late to do so”.

On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:25 AM Richard Eisenberg <rae at richarde.dev> wrote:

> I want to accept this. But, in the end, I don't see enough benefit (which
> seems to be mostly aesthetic) to justify the (somewhat modest, as these
> things go) costs.
>
> I sadly agree with the shepherd to reject.
>
> Richard
>
> On Mar 8, 2021, at 11:59 AM, Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de>
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> your points sounds reasonable, and the author got a heads up on the
> Github thread (so unlikely that there was a misunderstanding or
> oversight), so I’ll concur with the shepherd.
>
> Cheers,
> Joachim
>
>
> Am Montag, den 08.03.2021, 15:51 +0000 schrieb Simon Marlow:
>
> Committee,
>
> Proposal #367 suggests using unboxed sums for the results of 7 (seven)
> primops that use sum types but currently have to encode those explicitly
> using `Int#`.
>
>
> https://github.com/treeowl/ghc-proposals/blob/unboxed-sum-primops/proposals/0000-unboxed-sum-primops.md
>
> The proposal is arguably the right thing, however I'm suggesting we reject
> it for the following reasons:
> The implementations of the primops would bake in the translation of
> unboxed sums. Right now our unboxed sum translation is defined in one place
> - CorePrep - but this proposal would leak it into the implementations of a
> few primops.
> Migration would entail adding a backwards-compatibility layer, with the
> associated complexity and risk of performance regressions.
> While the current situation is perhaps inelegant, it's not broken and it's
> easy to understand.
> Thoughts?
>
> Simon
>
>
> On Sun, 4 Oct 2020 at 22:14, Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de>
> wrote:
>
> Dear Committee,
>
> this is your secretary speaking:
>
> Clarify primops using unboxed sum
> has been proposed by David Feuer
> https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/367
>
> https://github.com/treeowl/ghc-proposals/blob/unboxed-sum-primops/proposals/0000-unboxed-sum-primops.md
>
> I’ll propose Simon Marlow as the shepherd.
>
> Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in
> https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process
>
> Thanks,
> Joachim
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>
> --
> Joachim Breitner
>  mail at joachim-breitner.de
>  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20210309/ea49104f/attachment.html>