David If you want to suggest a couple of possible alternative 20-min slots in work time (London time zone), not Mon-Weds this week, then maybe we can find a mutually convenient time.
Do you have reason to suppose that the pattern you describe below is common? That is, if implemented, would it make a big difference to programs we care about? Simon From: David Feuer [mailto:david.fe...@gmail.com] Sent: 20 October 2014 13:58 To: Simon Peyton Jones Cc: ghc-devs Subject: Re: Help understanding Specialise.lhs To be super-clear about at least one aspect: I don't want Tidy Core to ever contain something that looks like this: GADTTest.potato :: GHC.Types.Int<http://GHC.Types.Int> -> GADTTest.Silly GHC.Types.Int<http://GHC.Types.Int> -> GHC.Types.Int<http://GHC.Types.Int> GADTTest.potato = \ (x_asZ :: GHC.Types.Int<http://GHC.Types.Int>) (ds_dPR :: GADTTest.Silly GHC.Types.Int<http://GHC.Types.Int>) -> case ds_dPR of _ { GADTTest.Silly $dNum_aLV ds1_dPS -> GHC.Num.+ @ GHC.Types.Int<http://GHC.Types.Int> $dNum_aLV x_asZ x_asZ } Here we see GHC.Num.+ applied to GHC.Types.Int<http://GHC.Types.Int> and $dNum_aLV. We therefore know that $dNum_aLV must be GHC.Num.$fNumInt, so GHC.Num.+ can eat these arguments and produce GHC.Num.$fNumInt_$c+. But for some reason, GHC fails to recognize and exploit this fact! I would like help understanding why that is, and what I can do to fix it. On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:53 AM, David Feuer <david.fe...@gmail.com<mailto:david.fe...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Oct 20, 2014 5:05 AM, "Simon Peyton Jones" <simo...@microsoft.com<mailto:simo...@microsoft.com>> wrote: > I’m unclear what you are trying to achieve with #9701. I urge you to write a > clear specification that we all agree about before burning cycles hacking > code. What I'm trying to achieve is to make specialization work in a situation where it currently does not. It appears that when the type checker determines that a GADT carries a certain dictionary, the specializer happily uses it *even once the concrete type is completely known*. What we would want to do in that case is to replace the use of the GADT-carried dictionary with a use of the known dictionary for that type. > There are a lot of comments at the top of Specialise.lhs. But it is, I’m > afraid, a tricky pass. I could skype. I would appreciate that. What day/time are you available?
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
