For papers, does it make sense to put the abstract in the description? Perhaps not; it’s a few paragraphs. Anyway, the part that jumped out at me was:
Furthermore, we present a novel program transformation to eliminate the overhead caused by higher-order functions. The main component of this transformation is lambda mangling: an important transformation primitive in Thorin. We demonstrate that lambda mangling subsumes many classic program transformations like tail-recursion elimination, loop unrolling or (partial) inlining.
If this and their performance claims are both true, I imagine a lot of compiler authors are going to be bemoaning how very difficult it is to switch to a better IR. The paper is short, but deep, and requires more time than I can give it while at work. I’ll try to add further commentary tonight, and I’d be fascinated to hear everyone else’s thoughts.
For papers, does it make sense to put the abstract in the description? Perhaps not; it’s a few paragraphs. Anyway, the part that jumped out at me was:
If this and their performance claims are both true, I imagine a lot of compiler authors are going to be bemoaning how very difficult it is to switch to a better IR. The paper is short, but deep, and requires more time than I can give it while at work. I’ll try to add further commentary tonight, and I’d be fascinated to hear everyone else’s thoughts.