import MkCore
import DynFlags
+import StaticFlags
import CostCentre
import Id
import PrelInfo
dsExpr (HsCase discrim matches@(MatchGroup _ rhs_ty))
| isEmptyMatchGroup matches -- A Core 'case' is always non-empty
= -- So desugar empty HsCase to error call
- mkErrorAppDs pAT_ERROR_ID (funResultTy rhs_ty) "case"
+ mkErrorAppDs pAT_ERROR_ID (funResultTy rhs_ty) (ptext (sLit "case"))
| otherwise
= do { core_discrim <- dsLExpr discrim
= case findField (rec_flds rbinds) lbl of
(rhs:rhss) -> ASSERT( null rhss )
dsLExpr rhs
- [] -> mkErrorAppDs rEC_CON_ERROR_ID arg_ty (showSDoc (ppr lbl))
- unlabelled_bottom arg_ty = mkErrorAppDs rEC_CON_ERROR_ID arg_ty ""
+ [] -> mkErrorAppDs rEC_CON_ERROR_ID arg_ty (ppr lbl)
+ unlabelled_bottom arg_ty = mkErrorAppDs rEC_CON_ERROR_ID arg_ty empty
labels = dataConFieldLabels (idDataCon data_con_id)
-- The data_con_id is guaranteed to be the wrapper id of the constructor
Of course, if rules aren't turned on then there is pretty much no
point doing this fancy stuff, and it may even be harmful.
+
+=======> Note by SLPJ Dec 08.
+
+I'm unconvinced that we should *ever* generate a build for an explicit
+list. See the comments in GHC.Base about the foldr/cons rule, which
+points out that (foldr k z [a,b,c]) may generate *much* less code than
+(a `k` b `k` c `k` z).
+
+Furthermore generating builds messes up the LHS of RULES.
+Example: the foldr/single rule in GHC.Base
+ foldr k z [x] = ...
+We do not want to generate a build invocation on the LHS of this RULE!
+
+To test this I've added a (static) flag -fsimple-list-literals, which
+makes all list literals be generated via the simple route.
+
+
\begin{code}
dsExplicitList :: PostTcType -> [LHsExpr Id] -> DsM CoreExpr
dsExplicitList elt_ty xs = do
dflags <- getDOptsDs
xs' <- mapM dsLExpr xs
- if not (dopt Opt_EnableRewriteRules dflags)
+ if opt_SimpleListLiterals || not (dopt Opt_EnableRewriteRules dflags)
then return $ mkListExpr elt_ty xs'
else mkBuildExpr elt_ty (mkSplitExplicitList (thisPackage dflags) xs')
where