Fix Trac #3717 by making exprOkForSpeculation a bit cleverer

[ghc-hetmet.git] / compiler / coreSyn / CoreUtils.lhs

diff --git a/compiler/coreSyn/CoreUtils.lhs b/compiler/coreSyn/CoreUtils.lhs
index d74c278..61bfd2e 100644 (file)
--- a/compiler/coreSyn/CoreUtils.lhs
+++ b/compiler/coreSyn/CoreUtils.lhs
@@ -631,6 +631,11 @@ it's applied only to dictionaries.
 --
 --  * Safe /not/ to evaluate even if normal order would do so
 --
+-- It is usually called on arguments of unlifted type, but not always
+-- In particular, Simplify.rebuildCase calls it on lifted types
+-- when a 'case' is a plain 'seq'. See the example in 
+-- Note [exprOkForSpeculation: case expressions] below
+--
 -- Precisely, it returns @True@ iff:
 --
 --  * The expression guarantees to terminate, 
@@ -656,9 +661,14 @@ it's applied only to dictionaries.
 exprOkForSpeculation :: CoreExpr -> Bool
 exprOkForSpeculation (Lit _)     = True
 exprOkForSpeculation (Type _)    = True
-    -- Tick boxes are *not* suitable for speculation
-exprOkForSpeculation (Var v)     = isUnLiftedType (idType v)
-                                && not (isTickBoxOp v)
+
+exprOkForSpeculation (Var v)     
+  | isTickBoxOp v = False     -- Tick boxes are *not* suitable for speculation
+  | otherwise     =  isUnLiftedType (idType v) -- c.f. the Var case of exprIsHNF
+                 || isDataConWorkId v          -- Nullary constructors
+                 || idArity v > 0              -- Functions
+                 || isEvaldUnfolding (idUnfolding v)   -- Let-bound values
+
 exprOkForSpeculation (Note _ e)  = exprOkForSpeculation e
 exprOkForSpeculation (Cast e _)  = exprOkForSpeculation e
 
@@ -718,7 +728,6 @@ isDivOp _                = False
 
 Note [exprOkForSpeculation: case expressions]
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
-
 It's always sound for exprOkForSpeculation to return False, and we
 don't want it to take too long, so it bales out on complicated-looking
 terms.  Notably lets, which can be stacked very deeply; and in any 
@@ -726,7 +735,7 @@ case the argument of exprOkForSpeculation is usually in a strict context,
 so any lets will have been floated away.
 
 However, we keep going on case-expressions.  An example like this one
-showed up in DPH code:
+showed up in DPH code (Trac #3717):
     foo :: Int -> Int
     foo 0 = 0
     foo n = (if n < 5 then 1 else 2) `seq` foo (n-1)