Re: Which of the following PrimTyCons have a pointer-sized representations

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Simon Marlow <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/12/12 21:31, Johan Tibell wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> |  I'm happy to call this -funbox-strict-small-fields. However, I'd like
>>> |  the documentation to talk about pointer-sized things as that, even
>>> |  though a bit operational sounding, has a clear meaning in my mind.
>>>
>>> I'm somewhat inclined to *change* the current flag so that
>>>
>>>          -funbox-strict-fields means "unbox small fields"
>>>          -funbox-all-strict-fields means "unbox ALL strict fields"
>>
>>
>> Lets go with -funbox-small-strict-fields to avoid unnecessary
>> breakages. If we end up enabling this flag by default eventually it
>> doesn't really matter what the name is as people will never type it
>> out explicitly.
>
>
> +1
>
> There are lots of users of the existing flag, we don't want to change its
> meaning.

Simon PJ, do you want me to rename the flag to
-funbox-small-strict-fields or do you want to do it? If you do it,
don't forget to update the documentation as well.

-- Johan