[m-rev.] for review: fix bug #226 - incorrect purity of lazy.read_if_val/2
paul at bone.id.au
Tue Jan 8 12:37:45 AEDT 2013
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 12:24:33PM +1100, Julien Fischer wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Paul Bone <paul at bone.id.au> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 11:06:21AM +1100, Julien Fischer wrote:
> >> For review by Paul.
> >> The comments in the bug report mentioned that we were awaiting some changes
> >> to the deep profiler before doing this, but since there is currently
> >> only a single
> >> call to read_if_val/2 in the deep profiler, I assume that these have been done.
> > No, that change never got made. But I'm not sure that it is necessary (I've
> > forgotten some of the details over the last 12 months). Your patch probably
> > makes it okay though.
> zs's main concern was merge conflicts, but if there's only a single call
> to read_if_val/2 I doubt there would be that many.
zs and I where passing the patch back and forth. I think it's currently in
my hands. I'm okay with handling any merge conflicts.
> > I think this promise should be wider and the build_var_use_list should be
> > impure.
> An added complication being that you would need to add an impure version
> of list.foldl since build_var_use_list is called using that.
More information about the reviews