| > 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
