Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 30.07.2015, 10:14 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton Jones:
| (I always have to look up the documentation for these, just a | suggestion but maybe it would be better to call them INLINEAFTER[n] | and INLINEBEFORE[n], or something?)
Maybe. But NOINLINE[n] means "do not inline until phase n; and you are free to do what you like thereafter" So it would have to be NOINLINEUNTIL[n]. But yes, that'd be quite do-able.
I support that suggestion, as I also always have to look it up as well, and things like NONLINE[~n] are really non-self-explanatory. Although "NOINLINEUNTIL[n]" is (to me, non-native-speaker) not as clear as it could be about what happens in phase n; the same with INLINEAFTER. How about this, using “from” and “before”, which (to me) make it clearer what happens at n: INLINE[n] becomes INLINEFROM[n] NOINLINE[n] becomes NOINLINEBEFORE[n] INLINE[~n] becomes INLINEBEFORE[n] NOINLINE[~n] becomes NOINLINEFROM[n] BTW, the docs say about NOINLINE “You shouldn't ever need to do this, unless you're very cautious about code size.” – should this also mention that NOINLINE are often necessary with RULES? Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim “nomeata” Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de • http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ Jabber: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de • GPG-Key: 0xF0FBF51F Debian Developer: nomeata@debian.org