{"action":"closed","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/haskell/cabal/issues/5817","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/haskell/cabal","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/haskell/cabal/issues/5817/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/haskell/cabal/issues/5817/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/haskell/cabal/issues/5817/events","html_url":"https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/5817","id":394806264,"node_id":"MDU6SXNzdWUzOTQ4MDYyNjQ=","number":5817,"title":"Profiling GHC itself for a package","user":{"login":"theindigamer","id":7187503,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjcxODc1MDM=","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/7187503?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer","html_url":"https://github.com/theindigamer","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/theindigamer/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":3,"created_at":"2018-12-29T16:01:54Z","updated_at":"2019-01-05T16:18:34Z","closed_at":"2019-01-05T16:18:34Z","author_association":"NONE","body":"I'm trying to look at GHC's performance when compiling different modules using\r\n\r\n```\r\ncabal v2-build --with-compiler=/home/varun/Code/ghc/inplace/bin/ghc-stage2\r\n```\r\n\r\nand setting `ghc-options: -O1 -Wall +RTS -pj -RTS` in the cabal file. Now I just realized that this will actually generate a profile for each invocation of GHC (and there must be 1 invocation per module?), overwriting the old profile if one exists already (which is not what I want).\r\n\r\nIs it possible to profile GHC for an entire package at once? The end result would be (say) a folder with a bunch of files named according to the module names. If not, how much work would it be to expose an interface to access `.prof` files on a per-module basis? If you agree that this would be a worthwhile addition and can provide a high level overview (e.g. 3-5 bullet points) of how to implement this, I'd be happy to contribute a patch."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"theindigamer"}}