
#9355: scanr does not participate in stream fusion -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: dfeuer | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: 7.8.4 Component: | Version: 7.8.3 libraries/base | Keywords: Resolution: | Architecture: Unknown/Multiple Operating System: | Difficulty: Moderate (less Unknown/Multiple | than a day) Type of failure: Runtime | Blocked By: performance bug | Related Tickets: Test Case: | Blocking: | Differential Revisions: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by dfeuer): Replying to [comment:2 nomeata]:
(because the argument to build isn't allowed to inspect its own result as the implementation in Data.List does),
I wouldn’t be surprised that returning `(# x, x:xs #)` is faster than returning `x:xs` and pattern matching on it. OTOH, the CPR optimization should change the code returning `x:xs` into (# x, xs #) and move the consing to the caller.
Can’t you do that by hand, i.e.:
{{{ scanrB :: forall a b . (a -> b -> b) -> b -> [a] -> [b] scanrB f q0 ls = build scr where scr :: forall c . (b -> c -> c) -> c -> c scr c n = case foldr go (q0, n) ls of (r, esult) -> c r esult where go x (r,est) = (f x r, r `c` est) }}}
The Core looks a bit nicer:
{{{ Scanr.scanrA :: forall a b. (a -> b -> b) -> b -> [a] -> [b] Scanr.scanrA = \ (@ a) (@ b) (f :: a -> b -> b) (q0 :: b) (ls :: [a]) -> let { a :: [b] a = GHC.Types.: q0 (GHC.Types.[]) } in letrec { $wgo :: [a] -> (# b, [b] #) $wgo = \ (w :: [a]) -> case w of _ { [] -> (# q0, a #); : y ys -> case $wgo ys of _ { (# ww1, ww2 #) -> let { fxr :: b fxr = f y ww1 } in (# fxr, GHC.Types.: fxr ww2 #) } }; } in case $wgo ls of _ { (# _, ww2 #) -> ww2 }
Scanr.scanrB :: forall a b. (a -> b -> b) -> b -> [a] -> [b] Scanr.scanrB = \ (@ a) (@ b) (f :: a -> b -> b) (q0 :: b) (ls :: [a]) -> letrec { $wgo :: [a] -> (# b, [b] #) $wgo = \ (w :: [a]) -> case w of _ { [] -> (# q0, GHC.Types.[] #); : y ys -> case $wgo ys of _ { (# ww1, ww2 #) -> (# f y ww1, GHC.Types.: ww1 ww2 #) } }; } in case $wgo ls of _ { (# ww1, ww2 #) -> GHC.Types.: ww1 ww2 } }}}
But I don’t expect there to be a measurable difference (and I didn’t check):
Some extra rules may be needed for map, et al.
not sure what you mean by that?
Sorry, I've been a tad confused, as usual. The problem, I now see, is the bunch of thunks we produce. I don't think it's possible to make `scanr` a good producer, and I'm not even sure we can make it a significantly better one (though I'd have to profile to be sure). What we ''can'' do, in an apparently incompatible fashion, is make it a good consumer. Start with the current tail-eating implementation: {{{#!hs scanr _ q0 [] = [q0] scanr f qo (x:xs) = f x q : qs where qs@(q:_) = scanr f q0 xs }}} Rewriting that pattern match thing more explicitly: {{{#!hs scanr f q0 (x:xs) = let qs = scanr f q0 xs in f x (head qs) : qs }}} This, then is a plain old fold: {{{#!hs scanr f q0 = foldr go [q0] xs where go x qs = f x (head qs) : qs }}} If we apply it to a `build`, we get {{{#!hs scanr f q0 (build g) = g go [q0] where go x qs = f x (head qs):qs }}} -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/9355#comment:3 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler