On Thu, Aug 12 2021, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
> Repro case is something like
> * Here is a source or files
> * Compile like this
> * Look at the generated Core...observe silly thing happening
Tried my best here:
https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/20237
Any help on this would be
On Tue, Aug 10 2021, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
> It's hard to tell what is happening without a repro case. Can you share one?
Haven't been able to do that with <10MB of output, I'm afraid ...
> You suggested that it might have something to do with using an
> operator. Does the same thing
Thanks for thinking about this one!
On Fri, Aug 06 2021, Tom Smeding wrote:
> Would it not be unsound for ghc to elide dictionary construction here?
> After all, the right-hand side might actually be a bottom
> (e.g. undefined) at run-time, in which case the pattern match cannot
> succeed
On Mon, Aug 09 2021, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
> Could you offer a small repro case, with a pointer to evidence that it
> matters in practice, and open a ticket?
I'll try my best, but I'm unsure how I would generate evidence. Could
you give me a hint?
Is there any way to see how far
I'm trying to figure out why this function from ConCat.AltCat is not
getting inlined:
(&&&) :: forall k a c d. (MProductCat k, Ok3 k a c d)
=> (a `k` c) -> (a `k` d) -> (a `k` Prod k c d)
f &&& g = (f *** g) . dup
<+ okProd @k @a @a
<+ okProd @k @c @d
{-# INLINE (&&&) #-}
So I put
On Wed, Aug 04 2021, Carter Schonwald wrote:
> I’m not sure about the pragma debugging, but are you using it in point free
> style? Cause I’m that case it may not be inclined because it’s not being
> fully applied on the left hand side?
Good point, but I checked, and it's fully applied. :-(
I
On Fri, Aug 06 2021, Michael Sperber wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 04 2021, Carter Schonwald wrote:
>
>> I’m not sure about the pragma debugging, but are you using it in point free
>> style? Cause I’m that case it may not be inclined because it’s not being
>> fully appli
I have another optimization problem. ConCat includes this definition:
(<+) :: Con a => (Con b => r) -> (a |- b) -> r
r <+ Entail (Sub Dict) = r
The right-hand argument of <+ leads to a dictionary construction that is
a proof of a certain property, but the dictionary itself ends up being
dead,
I'm trying to port Conal Elliott's ConCat plugin from ghc 8 to 9, and
the divergence checker foils me.
Background: The plugin works by transforming calls to a pseudo-function
toCcc' defined like so:
-- | Pseudo function to trigger rewriting to TOCCC form.
toCcc' :: forall k a b. (a -> b) -> (a
On Fri, Jan 20 2023, David Feuer wrote:
> I don't know what all that means exactly (especially since GHC's demand
> signatures have changed recently in a way I don't understand at all). But
> for hiding divergence, one option is to use a module with demand analysis
> disabled. Try {-#
On Fri, Jan 20 2023, David Feuer wrote:
> Actually, getting that arity probably isn't important anyway Try O0.
Ah, that worked. Many thanks!
--
Regards,
Mike
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
11 matches
Mail list logo
