Annotation for unfolding wanted

Georg Martius georg.martius at
Wed Aug 1 03:42:54 EDT 2007


I am sorry for using the wrong terminology here. Let me ask again:
Does it sound reasonable to extend the compiler with a pragma that specifies 
that a certain function should be compiled to a loop? And if the compiler can 
not do it, it helps with some error message. 


On Tuesday 31 July 2007 16:20, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> | However my point was more on a semantic point of view: If I write a
> | function in a recursive way, but actually do nothing else than a loop, I
> | would like a) that the compiler unrolls it to a loop and
> | b) that I can specify such a requirement, while violating it emits an
> | error.
> What does it mean to say "the compiler unrolls it to a loop".  If GHC sees
> a tail recursive function, it certainly compiles it to a loop!  (But that's
> not called "unrolling".)
> Simon

---- Georg Martius,  Tel: +49 177 6413311  -----
------- ----------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :

More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list