#12747: INLINE vs NOINLINE vs <nothing> give three different results; two would be better -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: MikolajKonarski | Owner: Type: feature request | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 Resolution: | Keywords: Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: #12603 #12781 | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Description changed by MikolajKonarski: @@ -5,3 +5,1 @@ - produces distinct figures in all three cases. - - See + produces distinct heap memory allocation figures in all three cases, see @@ -30,0 +28,3 @@ + + [Edit: another example is the code in description of ticket #12603, where + INLINE, NOINLINE and <nothing> each produce different "MUT time".] New description: INLINE vs NOINLE vs <nothing> for this function https://github.com/LambdaHack/LambdaHack/blob/e7b31a0d937b6ef6e53665eab23663... produces distinct heap memory allocation figures in all three cases, see https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12603?replyto=8#comment:7 and some later comments, but I'd like to move here the discussion of the specific feature request that <nothing> should at any given point be equivalent to either INLINE or NOINLINE. Three different results are very unwieldy while optimizing code, because one cannot tweak the INLINE pragma for functions in isolation, via fixing INLINE or NOINLINE for all other functions and varying only one, because the optimal setting for some functions may be <nothing>, and it naturally varies (as it should; that is fine; but in each particular codebase/compilation flags state it should be equal to either of INLINE or NOINLINE). It seems almost as if GHC considers a function for inlining in some stages, optimizes accordingly, but changes its mind in other places, not being bound by either INLINE nor NOINLINE, and so the resulting stack of optimizations is different than in either case. IMHO that's too complex behaviour for the programmer to follow, it should irreversibly decide whether to inline at exactly the same place it first takes into account the NO/INLINE pragmas, if present. [Edit: another example is the code in description of ticket #12603, where INLINE, NOINLINE and <nothing> each produce different "MUT time".] -- -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12747#comment:4 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler