bug#61660: closed ([feature request] optimization of case-lambda)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:19:42 +0100
with message-id <E9978E95-AF8C-4BCA-BC71-F3ACC75BB2B8@sarc.name>
and subject line Re: bug#61660: [feature request] optimization of case-lambda
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #61660,
regarding [feature request] optimization of case-lambda
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
61660: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=61660
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> [feature request] optimization of case-lambda
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Mon, 20 Feb 2023 18:56:25 +0100
>
>
>
>
> On 3.0.9
>
>
> > ,optimize ((case-lambda (() 0)))
> = 0
>
> but 
>
> > ,optimize ((case-lambda (() 0) ((a) 1)))
> = ((case-lambda (() 0) ((a) 1)))
>
>
> The problem with this is that when the output of a macro contains case-lambda, 
> recursive application results in geometrical increase of code size. It seems 
> that it should be possible to resolve the application on the spot; at last to 
> reduce the case-lambda to a simple lambda when the arity is available (which 
> now only happens when the case-lambda contains a single clause).
>
> Thanks
>
>   Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#61660: [feature request] optimization of case-lambda
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:19:42 +0100
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 27 Feb 2023, at 11:11, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Daniel,
> > 
> > lloda <lloda@sarc.name> skribis:
> > 
> >> From 61ed612fb36108e395bdee4b1bbb46b49ef017b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >> From: Daniel Llorens <lloda@sarc.name>
> >> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 17:38:10 +0100
> >> Subject: [PATCH] peval reduces some inlined case-lambda calls
> >> 
> >> * module/language/tree-il/peval.scm (peval): Reduce multiple case lambda
> >>  in <call> trees according to the number of arguments. Do not try to
> >>  reduce case-lambda using keyword arguments.
> >> * test-suite/tests/peval.test: Tests.
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> >> +++ b/module/language/tree-il/peval.scm
> >> @@ -1668,6 +1668,29 @@ top-level bindings from ENV and return the resulting 
> >> expression."
> >> 
> >>                   (log 'inline-end result exp)
> >>                   result)))))
> >> +           (($ <lambda> src-proc meta orig-body)
> >> +            ;; If there are multiple cases and one matches nargs, omit all 
> >> the others.
> >> +            (or (and
> >> +                 (lambda-case-alternate orig-body)
> >> +                 (let ((nargs (length orig-args)))
> >> +                   (let loop ((body orig-body))
> >> +                     (match body
> >> +                       (#f #f) ;; No matching case; an error.
> >> +                       (($ <lambda-case> src-case req opt rest kw inits 
> >> gensyms case-body alt)
> >> +                        (cond (kw
> >> +                               ;; FIXME: Not handling keyword cases.
> >> +                               #f)
> > 
> > Maybe s/FIXME/XXX/ since it’s at most a limitation, certainly not a bug.
> > 
> > It LGTM and Andy already approved it on IRC, so go ahead!
> > 
> > Ludo’.
>
> Apologies for not seeing this earlier. Pushed to 
> 3b47f87618047ebb8812788c64a44877a4f2e0dd. Thanks!
>
>   - Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---