DEV Community


Discussion on: Improving Elm's compiler output

robinheghan profile image
Robin Heggelund Hansen Author

monomorphising doesn't do inling. When a monomorphising compiler sees the following code:

listmap : (a -> b) -> List a -> List b
listmap fn list =
    List.foldl (\a acc -> fn a :: acc) list
    |> List.reverse

strs = listmap String.fromInt [ 1, 2, 3 ]

strs = listmap isEven [ 1, 2, 3 ]
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

it will generate two versions of listmap, one which has the type (Int -> String) -> List Int -> List String and one which has the type (Int -> Bool) -> List Int -> List Bool. It will then use the specialized listmap implementations where it can.

This allows the compiler to specialize code better, because it has precise type information.

Thread Thread
mshaka profile image

Oh...I misread that you used "monomorphishing" like as this article explained.

I've published my translation!

I appreciate your patience and kindness!