... | ... | @@ -73,14 +73,6 @@ Con: too verbose? |
|
|
|
|
|
Con: not immediately clear what will happen in the phases that aren't specified (the answer is: 'no inline', as opposed to the default 'maybe inline').
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Questions and possible minor variations
|
|
|
|
|
|
- With these pragmas, do we still need the brackets `[`..`]` as part of the syntax, or can we drop that, as in
|
|
|
|
|
|
```wiki
|
|
|
{-# INLINE_FROM 2 f #-}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Alternatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... | ... | @@ -102,4 +94,12 @@ Instead of adding such wordy pragmas, we can maybe make the content of the `[..] |
|
|
{-# INLINE[~n] f #-} becomes {-# INLINE[ > n] f #-}
|
|
|
{-# NOINLINE[n] f #-} becomes {-# MAY_INLINE[<= n] f #-}
|
|
|
{-# NOINLINE[~n] f #-} becomes {-# MAY_INLINE[ > n] f #-}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Questions and possible minor variations
|
|
|
|
|
|
- With these pragmas, do we still need the brackets `[`..`]` as part of the syntax, or can we drop that, as in
|
|
|
|
|
|
```wiki
|
|
|
{-# INLINE_FROM 2 f #-}
|
|
|
``` |
|
|
\ No newline at end of file |