Which of the following PrimTyCons have a pointer-sized representations

[Johan Tibell]

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
<simonpj at microsoft.com> wrote:
> You can use TyCon.tyConPrimRep, followed by primRepSizeW

Looking at primRepSizeW I see that the only PrimRep that is bigger
than one word is Doubles, Int64s, and Word64s on 32-bit platforms.
Manuel (I think wisely) suggested that we should make an exception for
these types and unpack them on 32-bit platforms if
-funbox-strict-primitive-fields is set, even thought technically they
will occupy more space than a pointer. The reasoning is that we want
to avoid surprising behavior when users move code between 32-bit and
64-bit platforms, as e.g. unpacking vs not-unpacking Doubles can make
a large difference in certain tight loops.

But this means that checking the size in can_unbox_prim is no longer
necessary, so I could remove that check. This does mean that if we
ever add a new PrimTyCon that has a size that's larger than a pointer,
the implementation of -funbox-strict-primitive-fields has to change.

The alternative would be for me to add

primRepSizeForUnboxW :: PrimRep -> Int
primRepSizeForUnboxW IntRep   = 1
primRepSizeForUnboxW WordRep  = 1
primRepSizeForUnboxW Int64Rep = 1    -- [Note: Primitive size exception]
primRepSizeForUnboxW Word64Rep= 1    -- [Note: Primitive size exception]
primRepSizeForUnboxW FloatRep = 1    -- NB. might not take a full word
primRepSizeForUnboxW DoubleRep= 1    -- [Note: Primitive size exception]
primRepSizeForUnboxW AddrRep  = 1
primRepSizeForUnboxW PtrRep   = 1
primRepSizeForUnboxW VoidRep  = 0

And use that function in can_unbox_prim. That way we'd get a pattern
match warning if we ever add a new PrimRep (and thus need to evaluate
if PrimTyCons with that PrimRep should be unpacked by
-funbox-strict-primitive-fields).

What do you think?

Cheers,
Johan