I agree that comment:2 was addressed, but what about comment:1? It seems to me that this was not addressed and was the original reason for leaving
#13208: Do two-phase inlining in simpleOptPgm -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: lukemaurer | Owner: (none) Type: bug | Status: closed Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.1 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: JoinPoints Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Test Case: | deSugar/should_compile/T13208 Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/merge_requests/394 -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by simonpj): the ticket open. Yes, you are right. * I'd like to get rid of `Note [Beta redexes]` in Core Lint. * The change to `simpleOptPgm` makes that more feasible. * But we do worker/wrapper join points, and currently w/w generates exactly these kind of beta redexes (contrary, I think, to the claim that it was only `simpleOptPgm`) I'm not sure it matters all that much, but yes we should leave the ticket open -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/13208#comment:8 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler