[Haskell] Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: cmonad 0.1.1

[Lennart Augustsson]

When I looked at it a year ago or so, it was a return of one
constructor in a sum.
Looking at core, you can see several places where a function is called
and that function always returns the same constructor, so the case
analysis of the return value is not needed; it should be returned as
an unboxed tuple instead
I'll see if I can get a simple example to illustrate the problem.

I talked to Simon PJ about it and he thought an analysis and
transformation for such a thing would be a good idea, but someone has
to do the work, of course.

Another unrelated problem, I think, is that ghc needs to promote
in-memory variables to registers when possible.
Perhaps the new code generator has such a transformation?

  -- Lennart

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 3:28 AM, Don Stewart <dons at galois.com> wrote:
> Nested constructed product returns? Or constructed sums?
>
> lennart:
>> Well, yes and no.  GHC actually does a decent job when given very
>> imperative code with references and mutable arrays.
>> Now the type I use to wrap the references to get type safe l-values
>> and r-values makes it tricker, and ghc lacks a crucial optimization
>> for specialization of constructor returns.
>> With that in place I think the code could be quite performant.
>