I think at first you just give it a -f flag, and let experience determine whether it should be part of -O or -O2. On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:10 PM Andreas Klebinger wrote:

Hello ghc-devs and haskell users.

I'm looking for opinions on when an optimization should be enabled by default.

-O is currently the base line for an optimized build. -O2 adds around 10-20% compile time for a few % (around 2% if I remember correctly) in performance for most things.

The question is now if I implement a new optimization, making code R% faster but slowing down the compiler down by C% at which point should an optimization be:

* Enabled by default (-O) * Enabled only at -O2 * Disabled by default

Cheap always beneficial things make sense for -O Expensive optimizations which add little make sense for -O2

But where exactly is the line here? How much compile time is runtime worth?

If something slows down the compiler by 1%/2%/5% and speeds up code by 0.5%/1%/2% which combinations make sense for -O, -O2?

Can there even be a good policy with the -O/-O2 split?

Personally I generally want code to either: * Typecheck/Run at all (-O0, -fno-code, repl) * Not blow through all my RAM when adding a few Ints while developing: -O ? * Make a reasonable tradeoff between runtime/compiletime: -O ? * Give me all you got: -O2 (-O99999)

The use case for -O0 is rather clear, so is -O2. But what do people consider the use case for -O

What trade offs seem acceptable to you as a user of GHC?

Is it ok for -O to become slower for faster runtimes? How much slower? Should all new improvements which might slow down compilation be pushed to -O2?

Or does an ideal solution add new flags? Tell me what do you think.

Cheers, Andreas Klebinger

_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

-- brandon s allbery kf8nh allbery.b@gmail.com

Hi, I used to think that the policy for being eligible for -O1 is that C must be non-positive, e.g. that the compile times don't suffer at all. Everything beyond that (well, given that R is positive) should be -O2 only. There's precedent at least for Late Lambda Lifting (which is only run for -O2) here: https://phabricator.haskell.org/D5224#147959. Upon re-reading I see that Simon Marlow identified C=1 as the hard threshold. Maybe there are other cases as well? Personally, I like C=0 for the fact that it means the compiler will only get faster over time. And any reasonably tuned release executable will do -O2 anyway. Cheers, Sebastian Am Di., 27. Aug. 2019 um 17:11 Uhr schrieb Andreas Klebinger < klebinger.andreas@gmx.at>:

Hello ghc-devs and haskell users.

I'm looking for opinions on when an optimization should be enabled by default.

-O is currently the base line for an optimized build. -O2 adds around 10-20% compile time for a few % (around 2% if I remember correctly) in performance for most things.

The question is now if I implement a new optimization, making code R% faster but slowing down the compiler down by C% at which point should an optimization be:

* Enabled by default (-O) * Enabled only at -O2 * Disabled by default

Cheap always beneficial things make sense for -O Expensive optimizations which add little make sense for -O2

But where exactly is the line here? How much compile time is runtime worth?

If something slows down the compiler by 1%/2%/5% and speeds up code by 0.5%/1%/2% which combinations make sense for -O, -O2?

Can there even be a good policy with the -O/-O2 split?

Personally I generally want code to either: * Typecheck/Run at all (-O0, -fno-code, repl) * Not blow through all my RAM when adding a few Ints while developing: -O ? * Make a reasonable tradeoff between runtime/compiletime: -O ? * Give me all you got: -O2 (-O99999)

The use case for -O0 is rather clear, so is -O2. But what do people consider the use case for -O

What trade offs seem acceptable to you as a user of GHC?

Is it ok for -O to become slower for faster runtimes? How much slower? Should all new improvements which might slow down compilation be pushed to -O2?

Or does an ideal solution add new flags? Tell me what do you think.

Cheers, Andreas Klebinger

_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs