Simon Peyton Jones <simon.peytonjo...@gmail.com> writes: > I don't think any top-level Ids should have OtherCon [] unfoldings? If > they do, can you give a repro case? OtherCon [] unfoldings usually mean "I > know this variable is evaluated, but I don't know what its value is. E.g > data T = MkT !a !a > f (MkT x y) = ... > > here x and y have OtherCon [] unfoldings. They are definitely not bottom! > Is there a reason why we wouldn't potentially give a static data constructor application an OtherCon [] unfolding? I would guess that usually these are small enough to have a CoreUnfolding, but in cases where the expression is too large to have an unstable unfolding we might rather want to give it an OtherCon [].
Cheers, - Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
