X-Git-Url: http://git.megacz.com/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=compiler%2FsimplCore%2FSimplify.lhs;h=7c88ad29e8c716340a03a13c5e4073cc526d7135;hb=63f6b0868f4948232f87bc4df52c9d3a2ec8f184;hp=10965a18455cfb3e03619b9b206cd1e5e05f7e9b;hpb=62eeda5aed31173b234b2965ccf4bd6979ffd9a4;p=ghc-hetmet.git diff --git a/compiler/simplCore/Simplify.lhs b/compiler/simplCore/Simplify.lhs index 10965a1..7c88ad2 100644 --- a/compiler/simplCore/Simplify.lhs +++ b/compiler/simplCore/Simplify.lhs @@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ prepareRhs env0 rhs0 where is_val = n_val_args > 0 -- There is at least one arg -- ...and the fun a constructor or PAP - && (isDataConWorkId fun || n_val_args < idArity fun) + && (isConLikeId fun || n_val_args < idArity fun) go _ env other = return (False, env, other) \end{code} @@ -578,7 +578,7 @@ completeBind env top_lvl old_bndr new_bndr new_rhs = return (addNonRecWithUnf env new_bndr new_rhs unfolding wkr) where unfolding | omit_unfolding = NoUnfolding - | otherwise = mkUnfolding (isTopLevel top_lvl) new_rhs + | otherwise = mkUnfolding (isTopLevel top_lvl) new_rhs old_info = idInfo old_bndr occ_info = occInfo old_info wkr = substWorker env (workerInfo old_info) @@ -623,7 +623,9 @@ addNonRecWithUnf :: SimplEnv addNonRecWithUnf env new_bndr rhs unfolding wkr = ASSERT( isId new_bndr ) WARN( new_arity < old_arity || new_arity < dmd_arity, - (ppr final_id <+> ppr old_arity <+> ppr new_arity <+> ppr dmd_arity) $$ ppr rhs ) + (ptext (sLit "Arity decrease:") <+> ppr final_id <+> ppr old_arity + <+> ppr new_arity <+> ppr dmd_arity) $$ ppr rhs ) + -- Note [Arity decrease] final_id `seq` -- This seq forces the Id, and hence its IdInfo, -- and hence any inner substitutions addNonRec env final_id rhs @@ -666,6 +668,28 @@ addNonRecWithUnf env new_bndr rhs unfolding wkr final_id = new_bndr `setIdInfo` final_info \end{code} +Note [Arity decrease] +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +Generally speaking the arity of a binding should not decrease. But it *can* +legitimately happen becuase of RULES. Eg + f = g Int +where g has arity 2, will have arity 2. But if there's a rewrite rule + g Int --> h +where h has arity 1, then f's arity will decrease. Here's a real-life example, +which is in the output of Specialise: + + Rec { + $dm {Arity 2} = \d.\x. op d + {-# RULES forall d. $dm Int d = $s$dm #-} + + dInt = MkD .... opInt ... + opInt {Arity 1} = $dm dInt + + $s$dm {Arity 0} = \x. op dInt } + +Here opInt has arity 1; but when we apply the rule its arity drops to 0. +That's why Specialise goes to a little trouble to pin the right arity +on specialised functions too. %************************************************************************ @@ -1763,11 +1787,20 @@ mkDupableCont env (CoerceIt ty cont) mkDupableCont env cont@(StrictBind {}) = return (env, mkBoringStop, cont) - -- See Note [Duplicating strict continuations] + -- See Note [Duplicating StrictBind] -mkDupableCont env cont@(StrictArg {}) - = return (env, mkBoringStop, cont) - -- See Note [Duplicating strict continuations] +mkDupableCont env (StrictArg fun cci ai cont) + -- See Note [Duplicating StrictArg] + = do { (env', dup, nodup) <- mkDupableCont env cont + ; (env'', fun') <- mk_dupable_call env' fun + ; return (env'', StrictArg fun' cci ai dup, nodup) } + where + mk_dupable_call env (Var v) = return (env, Var v) + mk_dupable_call env (App fun arg) = do { (env', fun') <- mk_dupable_call env fun + ; (env'', arg') <- makeTrivial env' arg + ; return (env'', fun' `App` arg') } + mk_dupable_call _ other = pprPanic "mk_dupable_call" (ppr other) + -- The invariant of StrictArg is that the first arg is always an App chain mkDupableCont env (ApplyTo _ arg se cont) = -- e.g. [...hole...] (...arg...) @@ -1948,32 +1981,71 @@ It's a bit silly to add the realWorld dummy arg in this case, making True -> $j s (the \v alone is enough to make CPR happy) but I think it's rare -Note [Duplicating strict continuations] -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -Do *not* duplicate StrictBind and StritArg continuations. We gain -nothing by propagating them into the expressions, and we do lose a -lot. Here's an example: - && (case x of { T -> F; F -> T }) E +Note [Duplicating StrictArg] +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +The original plan had (where E is a big argument) +e.g. f E [..hole..] + ==> let $j = \a -> f E a + in $j [..hole..] + +But this is terrible! Here's an example: + && E (case x of { T -> F; F -> T }) Now, && is strict so we end up simplifying the case with an ArgOf continuation. If we let-bind it, we get - - let $j = \v -> && v E + let $j = \v -> && E v in simplExpr (case x of { T -> F; F -> T }) (ArgOf (\r -> $j r) And after simplifying more we get - - let $j = \v -> && v E + let $j = \v -> && E v in case x of { T -> $j F; F -> $j T } Which is a Very Bad Thing +What we do now is this + f E [..hole..] + ==> let a = E + in f a [..hole..] +Now if the thing in the hole is a case expression (which is when +we'll call mkDupableCont), we'll push the function call into the +branches, which is what we want. Now RULES for f may fire, and +call-pattern specialisation. Here's an example from Trac #3116 + go (n+1) (case l of + 1 -> bs' + _ -> Chunk p fpc (o+1) (l-1) bs') +If we can push the call for 'go' inside the case, we get +call-pattern specialisation for 'go', which is *crucial* for +this program. + +Here is the (&&) example: + && E (case x of { T -> F; F -> T }) + ==> let a = E in + case x of { T -> && a F; F -> && a T } +Much better! + +Notice that + * Arguments to f *after* the strict one are handled by + the ApplyTo case of mkDupableCont. Eg + f [..hole..] E + + * We can only do the let-binding of E because the function + part of a StrictArg continuation is an explicit syntax + tree. In earlier versions we represented it as a function + (CoreExpr -> CoreEpxr) which we couldn't take apart. + +Do *not* duplicate StrictBind and StritArg continuations. We gain +nothing by propagating them into the expressions, and we do lose a +lot. + +The desire not to duplicate is the entire reason that +mkDupableCont returns a pair of continuations. + +Note [Duplicating StrictBind] +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +Unlike StrictArg, there doesn't seem anything to gain from +duplicating a StrictBind continuation, so we don't. + The desire not to duplicate is the entire reason that mkDupableCont returns a pair of continuations. -The original plan had: -e.g. (...strict-fn...) [...hole...] - ==> - let $j = \a -> ...strict-fn... - in $j [...hole...] Note [Single-alternative cases] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~