-
---------------------
-splitInlineCont :: SimplCont -> Maybe (SimplCont, SimplCont)
--- Returns Nothing if the continuation should dissolve an InlineMe Note
--- Return Just (c1,c2) otherwise,
--- where c1 is the continuation to put inside the InlineMe
--- and c2 outside
-
--- Example: (__inline_me__ (/\a. e)) ty
--- Here we want to do the beta-redex without dissolving the InlineMe
--- See test simpl017 (and Trac #1627) for a good example of why this is important
-
-splitInlineCont (ApplyTo dup (Type ty) se c)
- | Just (c1, c2) <- splitInlineCont c = Just (ApplyTo dup (Type ty) se c1, c2)
-splitInlineCont cont@(Stop ty _ _) = Just (mkBoringStop ty, cont)
-splitInlineCont cont@(StrictBind bndr _ _ se _) = Just (mkBoringStop (substTy se (idType bndr)), cont)
-splitInlineCont cont@(StrictArg _ fun_ty _ _) = Just (mkBoringStop (funArgTy fun_ty), cont)
-splitInlineCont other = Nothing
- -- NB: the calculation of the type for mkBoringStop is an annoying
- -- duplication of the same calucation in mkDupableCont
-\end{code}
-
-
-\begin{code}
-interestingArg :: OutExpr -> Bool
- -- An argument is interesting if it has *some* structure
- -- We are here trying to avoid unfolding a function that
- -- is applied only to variables that have no unfolding
- -- (i.e. they are probably lambda bound): f x y z
- -- There is little point in inlining f here.
-interestingArg (Var v) = hasSomeUnfolding (idUnfolding v)
- -- Was: isValueUnfolding (idUnfolding v')
- -- But that seems over-pessimistic
- || isDataConWorkId v
- -- This accounts for an argument like
- -- () or [], which is definitely interesting
-interestingArg (Type _) = False
-interestingArg (App fn (Type _)) = interestingArg fn
-interestingArg (Note _ a) = interestingArg a
-
--- Idea (from Sam B); I'm not sure if it's a good idea, so commented out for now
--- interestingArg expr | isUnLiftedType (exprType expr)
--- -- Unlifted args are only ever interesting if we know what they are
--- = case expr of
--- Lit lit -> True
--- _ -> False
-
-interestingArg other = True
- -- Consider let x = 3 in f x
- -- The substitution will contain (x -> ContEx 3), and we want to
- -- to say that x is an interesting argument.
- -- But consider also (\x. f x y) y
- -- The substitution will contain (x -> ContEx y), and we want to say
- -- that x is not interesting (assuming y has no unfolding)
projects / ghc-hetmet.git / blobdiff