| > data T = MkT !S | > data S = MkS Int | > | > then my impl will unbox the S field of MkT because the result is only one field | wide, namely an Int. | | Wouldn't Johan's have unboxed S too? (if not, I misunderstood what he did)
No, that would change the semantics! We don't want to do that. | I'm happy to call this -funbox-strict-small-fields. However, I'd like | the documentation to talk about pointer-sized things as that, even | though a bit operational sounding, has a clear meaning in my mind. I'm somewhat inclined to *change* the current flag so that -funbox-strict-fields means "unbox small fields" -funbox-all-strict-fields means "unbox ALL strict fields" And as you say to make -funbox-strict-fields implied by -O. But I do not feel strongly at all. You represent users; you decide. (or anyone else can pipe up). Simon _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list Cvs-ghc@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc