Yes, inl_act :: Activation controls what inlining takes place inl_inline :: InlineSpec says what the user originally wrote Perhaps I should beef up the comments. Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Ben | Gamari | Sent: 12 February 2017 17:48 | To: ghc-devs@haskell.org | Subject: Re: Convincing GHC not to produce unfoldings during | simplification | | Ben Gamari <ben@smart-cactus.org> writes: | | > I have observed that the floated bindings are not included in the | > interface file with -O0. Moreover, the core2core output clearly shows | > the unfoldings being added after the first simplifier phase. I haven't | > yet determined where in the simplifier these unfoldings are being | > introduced, but if anyone has ideas I'd love to hear them. | > | Ahhh, the inline pragma I was applying was wrong; I wanted | neverInlinePragma but instead rolled my own (incorrect) version of it. | | It's interesting that neverInlinePragma has a NeverActive activation with | EmptyInlineSpec. My intuition had lead me to an AlwaysActive activation | of a NoInline InlineSpec. | | Cheers, | | - Ben