> John Lato <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Both designs appear to offer similar performance in aggregate,
>> although there are differences for particular functions.  I haven't
>> yet had a chance to test the performance of the CPS variant, although
>> Oleg has indicated he expects it will be higher.

@jwlato:
Do you mind creating `IterateeCPS' tree in
<http://inmachina.net/~jwlato/haskell/iteratee/src/Data/>, so we can
start writing CPS performance testing code?

AFAICS, you have benchmarks for IterateeM-driven code already:
http://inmachina.net/~jwlato/haskell/iteratee/tests/benchmarks.hs


John Millikin <[email protected]> wrote:

> I wrote some criterion benchmarks for IterateeM vs IterateeCPS, and
> the CPS version was notably slower. I don't understand enough about
> CPS to diagnose why, but the additional runtime was present in even
> simple cases (reading from a file, writing back out).

@jmillikin:
Could you please publish those benchmarks?

Thanks.

-- 
vvv
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Reply via email to