| Indeed, we could eliminate several hundred lines of boilerplate in GHC if we
| could lift this restriction.
Can you be more specific? Which hundreds of lines?
Do add this info to the ticket when Gorge makes it. Or just make one!
Simon
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Ben Gamari [mailto:ben@smart-cactus.org]
| Sent: 29 December 2016 14:50
| To: Conal Elliott ; George Colpitts
|
| Cc: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org; Simon Peyton Jones
|
| Subject: Re: GHC rewrite rules for class operations & laws
|
| On December 28, 2016 7:27:20 PM EST, Conal Elliott wrote:
| >Hi, George. Yes, please do add a task, hopefully to serve as a
| >conversation anchor until the issues and path forward are clearer. From
| >my perspective, class methods are among the most natural and useful
| >candidates for rewrite rules, since they tend to have associated laws,
| >many (but not all) of which are helpful in optimization. The
| >alternative I know (and am using) is fairly inconvenient: replicating
| >entire APIs just in order to delay inlining long enough to apply rules.
| >
| Indeed, we could eliminate several hundred lines of boilerplate in GHC if we
| could lift this restriction.
|
| Cheers,
|
| - Ben
|
