>> Also, why do you want phase aliases?
>
> I don't quite see how to achieve this without aliases. This
> will be even more of a problem once I add additional fusion layers.
I've added phase equality to the implementation. It seems like a nice
clean extension.
Since this lets you add constraints
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Ah -- Roman you mean you want to add a phase-ordering constraint at some time
*other* than when you declare one or other of the phases. Are you sure this is
important?
Fairly. I've explained why in a follow-up to Max's message.
Also, why do you want phase aliases
> Ah -- Roman you mean you want to add a phase-ordering constraint at some time
> *other* than when you declare one or other of the phases. Are you sure this
> is important? It's an awkward addition because, like orphan instances, it
> means there's an interface file with perhaps-vital info wh
| giving up. Admittedly I only have a superstition that this will be a
| practical problem.
I agree with Roman -- let's not bother with lenience until we need it
| > Secondly, I think it is quite
| > important to be able to specify dependencies for already declared phases.
| > That is, I (probabl
Max Bolingbroke wrote:
If you don't need a dependency and it can be ignored anyway, why would you
want to specify it in the first place? I just can't quite imagine a
situation in which I would use this.
I think it makes sense because many of the inter-pass dependencies we
have in the GHC pipeli
> If you don't need a dependency and it can be ignored anyway, why would you
> want to specify it in the first place? I just can't quite imagine a
> situation in which I would use this.
I think it makes sense because many of the inter-pass dependencies we
have in the GHC pipeline today are actuall
Max Bolingbroke wrote:
Hi Roman,
Three things. Firstly, what would lenient ordering be useful for? You
probably had a specific use case in mind?
I suspect that when you have multiple plugins all specifying
constraints on the phase ordering independently it is possible to end
up in a situation
Hi Roman,
> Three things. Firstly, what would lenient ordering be useful for? You
> probably had a specific use case in mind?
I suspect that when you have multiple plugins all specifying
constraints on the phase ordering independently it is possible to end
up in a situation where using each plugin
Hi Max,
sorry for replying so late, I've completely forgotten about this.
I would be interested in feedback on the design before the
implementation is complete and in the wild. I'm especially interested
in hearing if you believe that loss of support for numeric phase
numbers > 2 is a problem, a
