ghci and unfoldings?

I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me that "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" (as in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings available? Thanks, - Conal

On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Conal Elliott
I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me that "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" (as in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings available?
I think unfoldings are only done as part of optimization, and the bytecode backend doesn't support optimization at all. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net

Hi Brandon. Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure that it addresses what I was
trying to ask. GHCi *does* invoke plugins and even reloads those plugins
dynamically when their source code changes. So in this sense ghci does
enable optimization, even if it doesn’t perform much optimization on its
own. And of course plugins and unfolding are not just about optimization.
I’m not looking for ghci to do optimization, but rather to enable me to
more easily develop my GHC plugins. It’s *almost* there already. I just
need access to unfoldings from other modules for my plugin’s use.
For context, I’m rebuilding my Haskell-to-hardware compiler
https://github.com/conal/talk-2015-haskell-to-hardware, which relies on
giving a non-standard but principled interpretation of Haskell programs via
a conversion through the language of cartesian closed categories (CCCs).
The first back-end is hardware generation (e.g., via Verilog), and I have
plans for several other CCC-based interpretations.
In addition to facilitating my plugin development, hosting in ghci will
make it much more pleasant for others to *use* the plugin during
exploratory programming, just as with ghci use in general. With access to
unfoldings, users will be able to generate circuit diagrams and Verilog
like those in my compiler talk immediately and directly from within ghci. I
also intend to make a GPU back-end for fast interactive graphics etc, which
would be much more fun in ghci than with batch compilation.
I hope this explanation clarifies my goals and motivation. I hope there’s a
way to access unfoldings from ghci currently or with a small amount of
effort.
Regards, - Conal
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Brandon Allbery
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Conal Elliott
wrote: I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me that "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" (as in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings available?
I think unfoldings are only done as part of optimization, and the bytecode backend doesn't support optimization at all.
-- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net

Does passing -fobject-code solve your problem? Edward Excerpts from Conal Elliott's message of 2016-01-17 22:18:49 -0800:
Hi Brandon. Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure that it addresses what I was trying to ask. GHCi *does* invoke plugins and even reloads those plugins dynamically when their source code changes. So in this sense ghci does enable optimization, even if it doesn’t perform much optimization on its own. And of course plugins and unfolding are not just about optimization.
I’m not looking for ghci to do optimization, but rather to enable me to more easily develop my GHC plugins. It’s *almost* there already. I just need access to unfoldings from other modules for my plugin’s use.
For context, I’m rebuilding my Haskell-to-hardware compiler https://github.com/conal/talk-2015-haskell-to-hardware, which relies on giving a non-standard but principled interpretation of Haskell programs via a conversion through the language of cartesian closed categories (CCCs). The first back-end is hardware generation (e.g., via Verilog), and I have plans for several other CCC-based interpretations.
In addition to facilitating my plugin development, hosting in ghci will make it much more pleasant for others to *use* the plugin during exploratory programming, just as with ghci use in general. With access to unfoldings, users will be able to generate circuit diagrams and Verilog like those in my compiler talk immediately and directly from within ghci. I also intend to make a GPU back-end for fast interactive graphics etc, which would be much more fun in ghci than with batch compilation. I hope this explanation clarifies my goals and motivation. I hope there’s a way to access unfoldings from ghci currently or with a small amount of effort.
Regards, - Conal
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Brandon Allbery
wrote: On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Conal Elliott
wrote: I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me that "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" (as in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings available?
I think unfoldings are only done as part of optimization, and the bytecode backend doesn't support optimization at all.
-- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net

Thanks for the suggestion. That flag doesn't appear to help. Still no
unfolding info.
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Edward Z. Yang
Does passing -fobject-code solve your problem?
Edward
Hi Brandon. Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure that it addresses what I was trying to ask. GHCi *does* invoke plugins and even reloads those plugins dynamically when their source code changes. So in this sense ghci does enable optimization, even if it doesn’t perform much optimization on its own. And of course plugins and unfolding are not just about optimization.
I’m not looking for ghci to do optimization, but rather to enable me to more easily develop my GHC plugins. It’s *almost* there already. I just need access to unfoldings from other modules for my plugin’s use.
For context, I’m rebuilding my Haskell-to-hardware compiler https://github.com/conal/talk-2015-haskell-to-hardware, which relies on giving a non-standard but principled interpretation of Haskell programs via a conversion through the language of cartesian closed categories (CCCs). The first back-end is hardware generation (e.g., via Verilog), and I have plans for several other CCC-based interpretations.
In addition to facilitating my plugin development, hosting in ghci will make it much more pleasant for others to *use* the plugin during exploratory programming, just as with ghci use in general. With access to unfoldings, users will be able to generate circuit diagrams and Verilog like those in my compiler talk immediately and directly from within ghci. I also intend to make a GPU back-end for fast interactive graphics etc, which would be much more fun in ghci than with batch compilation. I hope this explanation clarifies my goals and motivation. I hope
Excerpts from Conal Elliott's message of 2016-01-17 22:18:49 -0800: there’s a
way to access unfoldings from ghci currently or with a small amount of effort.
Regards, - Conal
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Brandon Allbery
wrote: On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Conal Elliott
wrote: I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me that "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" (as in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings available?
I think unfoldings are only done as part of optimization, and the bytecode backend doesn't support optimization at all.
-- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net

Oh! I spoke too soon. Yes, that flag does seem to make unfoldings
available. Thanks! Now more experimentation. Thanks again!
-- Conal
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Conal Elliott
Thanks for the suggestion. That flag doesn't appear to help. Still no unfolding info.
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Edward Z. Yang
wrote: Does passing -fobject-code solve your problem?
Edward
Hi Brandon. Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure that it addresses what I was trying to ask. GHCi *does* invoke plugins and even reloads those plugins dynamically when their source code changes. So in this sense ghci does enable optimization, even if it doesn’t perform much optimization on its own. And of course plugins and unfolding are not just about optimization.
I’m not looking for ghci to do optimization, but rather to enable me to more easily develop my GHC plugins. It’s *almost* there already. I just need access to unfoldings from other modules for my plugin’s use.
For context, I’m rebuilding my Haskell-to-hardware compiler https://github.com/conal/talk-2015-haskell-to-hardware, which relies on giving a non-standard but principled interpretation of Haskell programs via a conversion through the language of cartesian closed categories (CCCs). The first back-end is hardware generation (e.g., via Verilog), and I have plans for several other CCC-based interpretations.
In addition to facilitating my plugin development, hosting in ghci will make it much more pleasant for others to *use* the plugin during exploratory programming, just as with ghci use in general. With access to unfoldings, users will be able to generate circuit diagrams and Verilog like those in my compiler talk immediately and directly from within ghci. I also intend to make a GPU back-end for fast interactive graphics etc, which would be much more fun in ghci than with batch compilation. I hope this explanation clarifies my goals and motivation. I hope
Excerpts from Conal Elliott's message of 2016-01-17 22:18:49 -0800: there’s a
way to access unfoldings from ghci currently or with a small amount of effort.
Regards, - Conal
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Brandon Allbery
wrote: On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Conal Elliott
wrote: I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me that "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" (as in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings available?
I think unfoldings are only done as part of optimization, and the bytecode backend doesn't support optimization at all.
-- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net

Or -fexpose-all-unfoldings?
Simon
| -----Original Message-----
| From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of
| Edward Z. Yang
| Sent: 18 January 2016 06:37
| To: Conal Elliott

That's the flag I would expect. It doesn't seem to help or hinder
availability of unfoldings in GHCi. Do you think it should?
And Happy Birthday, Simon!
Warmly, - Conal
On Monday, January 18, 2016, Simon Peyton Jones
Or -fexpose-all-unfoldings?
Simon
| -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of | Edward Z. Yang | Sent: 18 January 2016 06:37 | To: Conal Elliott
| Cc: Andrew Farmer ; ghc-devs@haskell.org | Subject: Re: ghci and unfoldings? | | Does passing -fobject-code solve your problem? | | Edward | | Excerpts from Conal Elliott's message of 2016-01-17 22:18:49 -0800: | > Hi Brandon. Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure that it addresses | what | > I was trying to ask. GHCi *does* invoke plugins and even reloads | those | > plugins dynamically when their source code changes. So in this sense | > ghci does enable optimization, even if it doesn’t perform much | > optimization on its own. And of course plugins and unfolding are not | just about optimization. | > | > I’m not looking for ghci to do optimization, but rather to enable me | > to more easily develop my GHC plugins. It’s *almost* there already. | I | > just need access to unfoldings from other modules for my plugin’s | use. | > | > For context, I’m rebuilding my Haskell-to-hardware compiler | > https://github.com/conal/talk-2015-haskell-to-hardware, which | relies | > on giving a non-standard but principled interpretation of Haskell | > programs via a conversion through the language of cartesian closed | categories (CCCs). | > The first back-end is hardware generation (e.g., via Verilog), and I | > have plans for several other CCC-based interpretations. | > | > In addition to facilitating my plugin development, hosting in ghci | > will make it much more pleasant for others to *use* the plugin | during | > exploratory programming, just as with ghci use in general. With | access | > to unfoldings, users will be able to generate circuit diagrams and | > Verilog like those in my compiler talk immediately and directly from | > within ghci. I also intend to make a GPU back-end for fast | interactive | > graphics etc, which would be much more fun in ghci than with batch | compilation. | > I hope this explanation clarifies my goals and motivation. I hope | > there’s a way to access unfoldings from ghci currently or with a | small | > amount of effort. | > | > Regards, - Conal | > | > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Brandon Allbery | | > wrote: | > | > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Conal Elliott | wrote: | > > | > >> I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use | > >> ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my | > >> plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be | > >> unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me | that | > >> "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" | (as | > >> in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings | available? | > > | > > | > > I think unfoldings are only done as part of optimization, and the | > > bytecode backend doesn't support optimization at all. | > > | > > -- | > > brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine | > > associates | > > allbery.b@gmail.com | > > ballbery@sinenomine.net | > > unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad | > > | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fsine | > > | nomine.net&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cbaf2ef5 | > > | 5f8af447b42e608d31fd1cec1%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sda | > > ta=qMNmL5LmkgMp0ebkr6SzPQIwhySqOicZgEdW%2fhe6Q%2b0%3d | > > | _______________________________________________ | ghc-devs mailing list | ghc-devs@haskell.org | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmail.h | askell.org%2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fghc- | devs%0a&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cbaf2ef55f8af | 447b42e608d31fd1cec1%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=veoz | Ab6M7N9jZaJZ9tgXZ%2fI8jq7U%2b4YM1FcSXvqTcaw%3d

The minimum flags I've found to get ghci to provide unfoldings are -O and
-object-code. And it appears that both flags need to be present the first
time I load a module into GHCi. (I'm putting the flags in an OPTIONS_GHC
pragma.)
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Conal Elliott
That's the flag I would expect. It doesn't seem to help or hinder availability of unfoldings in GHCi. Do you think it should?
And Happy Birthday, Simon!
Warmly, - Conal
On Monday, January 18, 2016, Simon Peyton Jones
wrote: Or -fexpose-all-unfoldings?
Simon
| -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of | Edward Z. Yang | Sent: 18 January 2016 06:37 | To: Conal Elliott
| Cc: Andrew Farmer ; ghc-devs@haskell.org | Subject: Re: ghci and unfoldings? | | Does passing -fobject-code solve your problem? | | Edward | | Excerpts from Conal Elliott's message of 2016-01-17 22:18:49 -0800: | > Hi Brandon. Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure that it addresses | what | > I was trying to ask. GHCi *does* invoke plugins and even reloads | those | > plugins dynamically when their source code changes. So in this sense | > ghci does enable optimization, even if it doesn’t perform much | > optimization on its own. And of course plugins and unfolding are not | just about optimization. | > | > I’m not looking for ghci to do optimization, but rather to enable me | > to more easily develop my GHC plugins. It’s *almost* there already. | I | > just need access to unfoldings from other modules for my plugin’s | use. | > | > For context, I’m rebuilding my Haskell-to-hardware compiler | > https://github.com/conal/talk-2015-haskell-to-hardware, which | relies | > on giving a non-standard but principled interpretation of Haskell | > programs via a conversion through the language of cartesian closed | categories (CCCs). | > The first back-end is hardware generation (e.g., via Verilog), and I | > have plans for several other CCC-based interpretations. | > | > In addition to facilitating my plugin development, hosting in ghci | > will make it much more pleasant for others to *use* the plugin | during | > exploratory programming, just as with ghci use in general. With | access | > to unfoldings, users will be able to generate circuit diagrams and | > Verilog like those in my compiler talk immediately and directly from | > within ghci. I also intend to make a GPU back-end for fast | interactive | > graphics etc, which would be much more fun in ghci than with batch | compilation. | > I hope this explanation clarifies my goals and motivation. I hope | > there’s a way to access unfoldings from ghci currently or with a | small | > amount of effort. | > | > Regards, - Conal | > | > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Brandon Allbery | | > wrote: | > | > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Conal Elliott | wrote: | > > | > >> I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use | > >> ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my | > >> plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be | > >> unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me | that | > >> "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" | (as | > >> in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings | available? | > > | > > | > > I think unfoldings are only done as part of optimization, and the | > > bytecode backend doesn't support optimization at all. | > > | > > -- | > > brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine | > > associates | > > allbery.b@gmail.com | > > ballbery@sinenomine.net | > > unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad | > > | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fsine | > > | nomine.net&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cbaf2ef5 | > > | 5f8af447b42e608d31fd1cec1%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sda | > > ta=qMNmL5LmkgMp0ebkr6SzPQIwhySqOicZgEdW%2fhe6Q%2b0%3d | > > | _______________________________________________ | ghc-devs mailing list | ghc-devs@haskell.org | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmail.h | askell.org%2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fghc- | devs%0a&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cbaf2ef55f8af | 447b42e608d31fd1cec1%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=veoz | Ab6M7N9jZaJZ9tgXZ%2fI8jq7U%2b4YM1FcSXvqTcaw%3d

-fno-ignore-interface-pragmas might work. However the problem is really
that the interpreter cannot compile the full intermediate language of GHC
(it can't handle arbitrary unboxed tuples), and we work around that in a
fairly fragile way by disabling -O. By enabling unfoldings you might
expose the interpreter to some unboxed tuples which would cause it to
panic. It's unlikely this will get fixed in the near term, if I recall
correctly it's pretty hard to fix.
So I think the best fix is probably to use -fobject-code.
Cheers,
Simon
On 18 January 2016 at 18:28, Conal Elliott
The minimum flags I've found to get ghci to provide unfoldings are -O and -object-code. And it appears that both flags need to be present the first time I load a module into GHCi. (I'm putting the flags in an OPTIONS_GHC pragma.)
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Conal Elliott
wrote: That's the flag I would expect. It doesn't seem to help or hinder availability of unfoldings in GHCi. Do you think it should?
And Happy Birthday, Simon!
Warmly, - Conal
On Monday, January 18, 2016, Simon Peyton Jones
wrote: Or -fexpose-all-unfoldings?
Simon
| -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of | Edward Z. Yang | Sent: 18 January 2016 06:37 | To: Conal Elliott
| Cc: Andrew Farmer ; ghc-devs@haskell.org | Subject: Re: ghci and unfoldings? | | Does passing -fobject-code solve your problem? | | Edward | | Excerpts from Conal Elliott's message of 2016-01-17 22:18:49 -0800: | > Hi Brandon. Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure that it addresses | what | > I was trying to ask. GHCi *does* invoke plugins and even reloads | those | > plugins dynamically when their source code changes. So in this sense | > ghci does enable optimization, even if it doesn’t perform much | > optimization on its own. And of course plugins and unfolding are not | just about optimization. | > | > I’m not looking for ghci to do optimization, but rather to enable me | > to more easily develop my GHC plugins. It’s *almost* there already. | I | > just need access to unfoldings from other modules for my plugin’s | use. | > | > For context, I’m rebuilding my Haskell-to-hardware compiler | > https://github.com/conal/talk-2015-haskell-to-hardware, which | relies | > on giving a non-standard but principled interpretation of Haskell | > programs via a conversion through the language of cartesian closed | categories (CCCs). | > The first back-end is hardware generation (e.g., via Verilog), and I | > have plans for several other CCC-based interpretations. | > | > In addition to facilitating my plugin development, hosting in ghci | > will make it much more pleasant for others to *use* the plugin | during | > exploratory programming, just as with ghci use in general. With | access | > to unfoldings, users will be able to generate circuit diagrams and | > Verilog like those in my compiler talk immediately and directly from | > within ghci. I also intend to make a GPU back-end for fast | interactive | > graphics etc, which would be much more fun in ghci than with batch | compilation. | > I hope this explanation clarifies my goals and motivation. I hope | > there’s a way to access unfoldings from ghci currently or with a | small | > amount of effort. | > | > Regards, - Conal | > | > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Brandon Allbery | | > wrote: | > | > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Conal Elliott | wrote: | > > | > >> I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use | > >> ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my | > >> plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be | > >> unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me | that | > >> "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" | (as | > >> in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings | available? | > > | > > | > > I think unfoldings are only done as part of optimization, and the | > > bytecode backend doesn't support optimization at all. | > > | > > -- | > > brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine | > > associates | > > allbery.b@gmail.com | > > ballbery@sinenomine.net | > > unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad | > > | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fsine | > > | nomine.net&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cbaf2ef5 | > > | 5f8af447b42e608d31fd1cec1%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sda | > > ta=qMNmL5LmkgMp0ebkr6SzPQIwhySqOicZgEdW%2fhe6Q%2b0%3d | > > | _______________________________________________ | ghc-devs mailing list | ghc-devs@haskell.org | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmail.h | askell.org%2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fghc- | devs%0a&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com %7cbaf2ef55f8af | 447b42e608d31fd1cec1%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=veoz | Ab6M7N9jZaJZ9tgXZ%2fI8jq7U%2b4YM1FcSXvqTcaw%3d _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

Ah….It seems that to get unfoldings exposed in the module you are compiling you need both
· -fno-omit-interface-pragmas
· -fexpose-all-unfoldings
And GHCi and –O0 both imply –fomit-interface-pragmas.
To see the unfoldings on imported functions you need –fno-ignore-interface pragmas.
Arguably –fexpose-all-unfoldings should override –fomit-interface-pragmas, which it doesn’t at the moment. Open a ticket if you think that would be useful and important. I can give guidance about the places.
Simon
From: conal.elliott@gmail.com [mailto:conal.elliott@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Conal Elliott
Sent: 18 January 2016 17:47
To: Simon Peyton Jones

Thanks for the additional tips. I'm having very inconsistent results with
unfolding definitions from other modules in ghci, even with all of these
flags. I'll keep poking at it until I have some consistent info and
questions.
-- Conal
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Simon Peyton Jones
Ah….It seems that to get unfoldings exposed in the *module you are compiling* you need *both*
· -fno-omit-interface-pragmas
· -fexpose-all-unfoldings
And GHCi and –O0 both imply –fomit-interface-pragmas.
To see the unfoldings on *imported* functions you need –fno-ignore-interface pragmas.
Arguably –fexpose-all-unfoldings should override –fomit-interface-pragmas, which it doesn’t at the moment. Open a ticket if you think that would be useful and important. I can give guidance about the places.
Simon
*From:* conal.elliott@gmail.com [mailto:conal.elliott@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Conal Elliott *Sent:* 18 January 2016 17:47 *To:* Simon Peyton Jones
*Cc:* Edward Z. Yang ; Andrew Farmer ; ghc-devs@haskell.org *Subject:* Re: ghci and unfoldings?
That's the flag I would expect. It doesn't seem to help or hinder availability of unfoldings in GHCi. Do you think it should?
And Happy Birthday, Simon!
Warmly, - Conal
On Monday, January 18, 2016, Simon Peyton Jones
wrote: Or -fexpose-all-unfoldings?
Simon
| -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org
] On Behalf Of | Edward Z. Yang | Sent: 18 January 2016 06:37 | To: Conal Elliott | Cc: Andrew Farmer ; ghc-devs@haskell.org | Subject: Re: ghci and unfoldings? | | Does passing -fobject-code solve your problem? | | Edward | | Excerpts from Conal Elliott's message of 2016-01-17 22:18:49 -0800: | > Hi Brandon. Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure that it addresses | what | > I was trying to ask. GHCi *does* invoke plugins and even reloads | those | > plugins dynamically when their source code changes. So in this sense | > ghci does enable optimization, even if it doesn’t perform much | > optimization on its own. And of course plugins and unfolding are not | just about optimization. | > | > I’m not looking for ghci to do optimization, but rather to enable me | > to more easily develop my GHC plugins. It’s *almost* there already. | I | > just need access to unfoldings from other modules for my plugin’s | use. | > | > For context, I’m rebuilding my Haskell-to-hardware compiler | > https://github.com/conal/talk-2015-haskell-to-hardware, which | relies | > on giving a non-standard but principled interpretation of Haskell | > programs via a conversion through the language of cartesian closed | categories (CCCs). | > The first back-end is hardware generation (e.g., via Verilog), and I | > have plans for several other CCC-based interpretations. | > | > In addition to facilitating my plugin development, hosting in ghci | > will make it much more pleasant for others to *use* the plugin | during | > exploratory programming, just as with ghci use in general. With | access | > to unfoldings, users will be able to generate circuit diagrams and | > Verilog like those in my compiler talk immediately and directly from | > within ghci. I also intend to make a GPU back-end for fast | interactive | > graphics etc, which would be much more fun in ghci than with batch | compilation. | > I hope this explanation clarifies my goals and motivation. I hope | > there’s a way to access unfoldings from ghci currently or with a | small | > amount of effort. | > | > Regards, - Conal | > | > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Brandon Allbery | | > wrote: | > | > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Conal Elliott | wrote: | > > | > >> I'm developing a GHC plugin (using HERMIT), and I'd like to use | > >> ghci to speed up development. I'm able to do so, except that my | > >> plugin critically needs access to unfoldings, which appear to be | > >> unavailable in ghci. A little experimenting with ghc shows me | that | > >> "-O" is the key, but "-O" is incompatible with "--interactive" | (as | > >> in ghci). Is there any way to persuade ghci to make unfoldings | available? | > > | > > | > > I think unfoldings are only done as part of optimization, and the | > > bytecode backend doesn't support optimization at all. | > > | > > -- | > > brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine | > > associates | > > allbery.b@gmail.com | > > ballbery@sinenomine.net | > > unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad | > > | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fsine | > > | nomine.net https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fnomine.net&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cb669a024c5b84ab83f3008d3202f635e%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=7lx6Ayz03bCdiHv1O0TkKOrwNQNFYRUhHRCZR%2bAEPmg%3d &data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2f40064d.mgd.microsoft.com&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cb669a024c5b84ab83f3008d3202f635e%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=nLmnL5PxzSjH%2bo8TnPLfoWgC0ySSaNIYXxfY6gKBGLA%3d %7cbaf2ef5 | > > | 5f8af447b42e608d31fd1cec1%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sda | > > ta=qMNmL5LmkgMp0ebkr6SzPQIwhySqOicZgEdW%2fhe6Q%2b0%3d | > > | _______________________________________________ | ghc-devs mailing list | ghc-devs@haskell.org | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmail.h | askell.org https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2faskell.org&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cb669a024c5b84ab83f3008d3202f635e%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=0GhykVs2C40ykmJwU2Yrq2D4kxV4hd%2bAtVoV%2b%2bMptPo%3d %2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fghc- | devs%0a&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2f40064d.mgd.microsoft.com&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cb669a024c5b84ab83f3008d3202f635e%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=nLmnL5PxzSjH%2bo8TnPLfoWgC0ySSaNIYXxfY6gKBGLA%3d %7cbaf2ef55f8af | 447b42e608d31fd1cec1%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=veoz | Ab6M7N9jZaJZ9tgXZ%2fI8jq7U%2b4YM1FcSXvqTcaw%3d
participants (5)
-
Brandon Allbery
-
Conal Elliott
-
Edward Z. Yang
-
Simon Marlow
-
Simon Peyton Jones