At Fri, 7 Dec 2012 11:20:12 +0100, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote: > > Naively, I thought this was a no brainer for the inliner: small > functions, used only once, no complex control flow. Why does it gives > up? > > BTW, doing the inlines manually does actually make a difference in the > total running time, so It would be nice to have this done > automatically. > > (Attached there's the whole, compilable, program).
The upcoming version of Optimization Coach tries to do a better job at explaining inlining failures. Specifically, I'm working on function size-related heuristics that look like they may help here. Could you send me some representative input? I'd like to test the new Optimization Coach with your program. Thanks! Vincent ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
