Hello Tim, Saturday, December 15, 2007, 5:35:03 PM, you wrote:
> the inliner can do the job of inlining (a fixed number of) iterations > of a recursive function -- I don't know if it does this now, but it > would be easy to implement. > It may be that GHC *doesn't* inline tail-recursive functions, but as I > pointed out above (which I'm just getting directly from the paper), it > would be easy i see your point - it's easy to implement everything in GHC. probably its authors was sleeping last 15 years :) > as above, loop unrolling turns out to be just a special case of > inlining. and ghc was so genuine that it was implemented general case without implementing special one :) > That's not true in C. The simplicity of Haskell (or rather, > Core) means it's easy to implement a lot of things with a great deal > of generality, an advantage that gcc doesn't have. Core language has the same complexity for generating good code as C, C-- or LLVM > Or, I mean, feel free to insist things are impossible, but try not to > stand in the way of the people who are doing them while you say so. > :-) you may believe in what you want. i prefer to say about real situation. if it will be possible to quickly write good Haskell compiler, it was be written many years ago -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe