[m-rev.] for review: Optimise modechecking of coerce for large types.

[Peter Wang]

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 16:39:25 +1000 "Zoltan Somogyi" <zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 16:00:52 +1000, Peter Wang <novalazy at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 15:12:15 +1000 "Zoltan Somogyi" <zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com> wrote:
> > I wouldn't mind reading it, but you forgot to attach it :)
> 
> It should be there now.

Thanks.

> > > By the way, I just realised that with one exception, my stress tests
> > > are not in the git repository. I think they should be there.
> > > I could add them as benchmarks/stress_tests. Any proposals
> > > for better names? Or should I create a separate repository for them?
> > 
> > tests/stress and don't run it by default?
> 
> I thought of that, but then it would be a permanent exception,
> different from all the others subdirs of tests. At the moment,
> everything in tests is (intended, at least eventually) to run
> on every bootcheck, while nothing in benchmarks is run by
> bootchecks, and I would prefer to keep it that way.

That's fine.

> 
> Unless you are proposing that, on some bootchecks at least,
> we should compile the stress tests?

Nah, I feel like it will just be a waste of everyone's time
(and CPU time).

Peter