[MLton] Question on profile.fun
Fri, 10 Jun 2005 23:28:26 -0400 (EDT)
> > Here are the results of that experiment:
> > 1.97 dropProfileR
> > flatten (* without shrinking *)
> > 1.94 dropProfileFlatten
> > shrink
> > 12.94 dropProfileS
> > Well, the above is encouraging, at least from the point of view that it
> > confirms that flatten itself isn't really sensitive to the presence of
> > profiling annotations.
> Two things jumped out at me from looking at the pre/post shrink pass.
> * The other situation is that we don't simplify Case blocks that
> have profile statements.
> This seems much more significant. It also seems that it could be
> accomodated by duplicating the profile statements when a trace through a
> Case block is taken. We specifically rule this out by only simplifying
> Case blocks where 0 = Vector.length statements.
I doubt anyone else is hacking on this, but, just in case, I'm laying
claim to this improvement. I've had some initial success modifying the
shrinker to handle this situation, and I think I see some clear means of
extending it to handle more. Hope to report by the end of the weekend.