From: simonpj@microsoft.com Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:21:50 +0000 (+0000) Subject: Remove old, redundant note X-Git-Tag: 2009-11-15~5 X-Git-Url: http://git.megacz.com/?p=ghc-hetmet.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=b3ac03eb1d7a3f993cc9b4cbcc4815b52b2aea0b Remove old, redundant note --- diff --git a/compiler/typecheck/TcInstDcls.lhs b/compiler/typecheck/TcInstDcls.lhs index 4d614e2..96e63aa 100644 --- a/compiler/typecheck/TcInstDcls.lhs +++ b/compiler/typecheck/TcInstDcls.lhs @@ -208,93 +208,6 @@ which brings appropriate tyvars into scope. This happens for both and for , but that doesn't matter: the *renamer* will have complained if 'b' is mentioned in . -Note [Inline dfuns unconditionally] -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -The code above unconditionally inlines dict funs. Here's why. -Consider this program: - - test :: Int -> Int -> Bool - test x y = (x,y) == (y,x) || test y x - -- Recursive to avoid making it inline. - -This needs the (Eq (Int,Int)) instance. If we inline that dfun -the code we end up with is good: - - Test.$wtest = - \r -> case ==# [ww ww1] of wild { - PrelBase.False -> Test.$wtest ww1 ww; - PrelBase.True -> - case ==# [ww1 ww] of wild1 { - PrelBase.False -> Test.$wtest ww1 ww; - PrelBase.True -> PrelBase.True []; - }; - }; - Test.test = \r [w w1] - case w of w2 { - PrelBase.I# ww -> - case w1 of w3 { PrelBase.I# ww1 -> Test.$wtest ww ww1; }; - }; - -If we don't inline the dfun, the code is not nearly as good: - - (==) = case PrelTup.$fEq(,) PrelBase.$fEqInt PrelBase.$fEqInt of tpl { - PrelBase.:DEq tpl1 tpl2 -> tpl2; - }; - - Test.$wtest = - \r [ww ww1] - let { y = PrelBase.I#! [ww1]; } in - let { x = PrelBase.I#! [ww]; } in - let { sat_slx = PrelTup.(,)! [y x]; } in - let { sat_sly = PrelTup.(,)! [x y]; - } in - case == sat_sly sat_slx of wild { - PrelBase.False -> Test.$wtest ww1 ww; - PrelBase.True -> PrelBase.True []; - }; - - Test.test = - \r [w w1] - case w of w2 { - PrelBase.I# ww -> - case w1 of w3 { PrelBase.I# ww1 -> Test.$wtest ww ww1; }; - }; - -Why didn't GHC inline $fEq in those days? Because it looked big: - - PrelTup.zdfEqZ1T{-rcX-} - = \ @ a{-reT-} :: * @ b{-reS-} :: * - zddEq{-rf6-} _Ks :: {PrelBase.Eq{-23-} a{-reT-}} - zddEq1{-rf7-} _Ks :: {PrelBase.Eq{-23-} b{-reS-}} -> - let { - zeze{-rf0-} _Kl :: (b{-reS-} -> b{-reS-} -> PrelBase.Bool{-3c-}) - zeze{-rf0-} = PrelBase.zeze{-01L-}@ b{-reS-} zddEq1{-rf7-} } in - let { - zeze1{-rf3-} _Kl :: (a{-reT-} -> a{-reT-} -> PrelBase.Bool{-3c-}) - zeze1{-rf3-} = PrelBase.zeze{-01L-} @ a{-reT-} zddEq{-rf6-} } in - let { - zeze2{-reN-} :: ((a{-reT-}, b{-reS-}) -> (a{-reT-}, b{-reS-})-> PrelBase.Bool{-3c-}) - zeze2{-reN-} = \ ds{-rf5-} _Ks :: (a{-reT-}, b{-reS-}) - ds1{-rf4-} _Ks :: (a{-reT-}, b{-reS-}) -> - case ds{-rf5-} - of wild{-reW-} _Kd { (a1{-rf2-} _Ks, a2{-reZ-} _Ks) -> - case ds1{-rf4-} - of wild1{-reX-} _Kd { (b1{-rf1-} _Ks, b2{-reY-} _Ks) -> - PrelBase.zaza{-r4e-} - (zeze1{-rf3-} a1{-rf2-} b1{-rf1-}) - (zeze{-rf0-} a2{-reZ-} b2{-reY-}) - } - } } in - let { - a1{-reR-} :: ((a{-reT-}, b{-reS-})-> (a{-reT-}, b{-reS-})-> PrelBase.Bool{-3c-}) - a1{-reR-} = \ a2{-reV-} _Ks :: (a{-reT-}, b{-reS-}) - b1{-reU-} _Ks :: (a{-reT-}, b{-reS-}) -> - PrelBase.not{-r6I-} (zeze2{-reN-} a2{-reV-} b1{-reU-}) - } in - PrelBase.zdwZCDEq{-r8J-} @ (a{-reT-}, b{-reS-}) a1{-reR-} zeze2{-reN-}) - -and it's not as bad as it seems, because it's further dramatically -simplified: only zeze2 is extracted and its body is simplified. %************************************************************************