Remove inlining for mod for Int
#3309
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Member
Author
|
I'm going to go ahead and merge this, so we can get the corresponding part in the Prelude wrapped up. It shouldn't actually break anything even if it is wrong (and I'm pretty confident it's not) - it will just generate worse code. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is for purescript/purescript-prelude#161 - the new mod definition for int is no longer straightforward (currently
x % y, new one will beMath.abs(((x % y) + y) % y)), so the advantage of inlining is probably minimal now. As a benefit, this also means that the issue I raised in there about the mod behaviour differing between compiler versions on the same library will not be the case, since this won't be overriding the FFI implementation provided in there.