Yes, all the inlining you expect should indeed happen. If it doesn't can you show us an example? Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Manuel M. T. Chakravarty [mailto:chak@cse.unsw.edu.au] | Sent: 11 December 2000 13:41 | To: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org | Cc: keller@it.uts.edu.au | Subject: Transitive inlining | | | In the context of the array library, we stumbled over | another problem. Does GHC transitive inlining across | modules? Let's say, we have the following scenario: | | module B (foo) where | | {-# INLINE foo #-} | foo .. = ...bar... | | {-# INLINE bar #-} | bar .. = ... | | | module L (baz) where | | import B | | {#- INLINE baz #-} | baz .. = ...B.foo... | | | module Main where | | import L | | main .. = ...L.baz... | | GHC in this case inlines the whole expression "...B.foo..." | in `Main', but will it inline the right hand side of `B.bar' | in `Main' (or even of `B.foo')? If the INLINE pragma is | transitive across modules boundaries, one would hope so. | | It seems that GHC is not (always?) doing this inlining, | which already for a very simple benchmark costs us a factor | of 5 runtime! (With inlining - enforced by copying | definitions manually into `Main' - the code produced by GHC | is actually a little bit faster than the code for the | corresponding C program). | | Cheers, | Manuel | | PS: I had problems building GHCi and it seems as if my | message to cvs-ghc@haskell.org doesn't get through | somehow... | | _______________________________________________ | Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list | Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org | http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users |