ghc -Onot -fstrictness --make Main1.hs && ghc -Onot -fstrictness --make Main2.hs && ghc -Onot -fstrictness --make Main3.hs
time Main1 < nums real 0m39.530s user 0m0.015s sys 0m0.030s time Main2 < nums real 0m14.078s user 0m0.015s sys 0m0.015s time Main3.exe < nums real 0m41.342s user 0m0.015s sys 0m0.015s still, i'm going to google up strictness analysis to at least know what made no difference in this case ;-) btw, why is the example #2 ( http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=sumcol&lang=ghc&id=2) (which kicks collective asses of all other participants) not considered in the shootout ? Too much optimizations ? On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 6:27 AM, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 666wman: > > just for the kicks i tried the new version of bytestring without -O2 > and > > the results were even worse: > > Note that without -O or -O2 no strictness analysis is performed. So that > tail recursive loop ... won't be. You could try -Onot -fstrictness just > for kicks, to see why strictness analysis is important when writing in a > tail recursive style. > > -- Don >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
