So does that mean Tidy produces unique `occNameFS`s, and then `Prep`
breaks them?

Tidy does not produce unique OccNames.  Rather, it avoids shadowing, so that if you delete all the uniques and print out the program (which is precisely what happens in an .hi file) you'll still get something sensible.

I'm not sure whether or not Prep maintains this invariant.  There is no particular reason it should.  It might, but it is not (currently) a goal.

Simon

On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 at 04:35, Gergő Érdi <gergo@erdi.hu> wrote:
So does that mean Tidy produces unique `occNameFS`s, and then `Prep`
breaks them?

On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 10:35 PM Josh Meredith
<joshmeredith2008@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I encountered this when we used that for Plutus. I'll have to dig up the details, but IIRC `toIfaceExpr` expects GHC to have already tidied the output, which deals with this issue of overlapping variable names.
>
> Cheers,
> Josh
>
> On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 at 01:26, ÉRDI Gergő <gergo@erdi.hu> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm trying to save (Prep'd) Core bindings right next to the serialized
>> `ModIface` (so basically `put_`ing them into the same bytestream, after the
>> `ModIface`), and that's exactly what the functions in `GHC.CoreToIface`
>> seem to be for, so I expected it to Just Work. However, I noticed that I
>> very frequently get problems with shadowing. For example, Core that looks
>> like `\v{u1} v{u2} -> v{u1}` would get translated to `\v v -> v`, which is
>> disastrous since these locally bound `Var`s are represented as just their
>> `getOccFS` (i.e. the `FastString` `"v"`).
>>
>> But this can't be right: if `toIfaceExpr` &c. would fail this blatently,
>> then the unfoldings couldn't be saved & restored, which is something GHC
>> itself does as part of normal `.hi` file handling. So clearly I must be
>> doing something wrong.
>>
>> So I guess my question could be, what could be causing `toIfaceExpr` (a
>> pure function!) to behave this way for my Cores? But then, if I look at
>> the implementation of `toIface*`, I can see that it really doesn't do
>> anything smarter than just storing `getOccFS` in the interface (no
>> uniques in sight)-- so maybe my *real* question is, what is GHC itself
>> doing so that it doesn't have this same problem?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>         Gergo
>> _______________________________________________
>> ghc-devs mailing list
>> ghc-devs@haskell.org
>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs@haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs