Ok, thank you for all your answers. I'm going to use NFData as advised
by everyone.
Paul
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:38:50AM -0700, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Paul Brauner wrote:
>
> > Thank you, I will look at that. But it seems that criterion uses NFData no?
> >
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Paul Brauner wrote:
> Thank you, I will look at that. But it seems that criterion uses NFData no?
>
I do not know of anything wrong with NFData. What you're seeing is much more
likely to be a bug in either the benchmarking library you're using, or in
your use of
Thank you, I will look at that. But it seems that criterion uses NFData
no?
Paul
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:57:20PM +0200, Bas van Dijk wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Paul Brauner wrote:
> > data Term = Lam Term | App Term Term | Var Int
> >
> > instance NFData where
> > rnf (Lam t)
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Bas van Dijk wrote:
> main = let !t = genterm in defaultMain [bench "subst" $ nf (subst u) t]
Oops, that should be:
main = let t = genterm in rnf t `seq` defaultMain [bench "subst" $ nf
(subst u) t]
Bas
___
Haskell-Ca
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Paul Brauner wrote:
> data Term = Lam Term | App Term Term | Var Int
>
> instance NFData where
> rnf (Lam t) = rnf t
> rnf (App t1 t2) = rnf t1 `seq` rnf t2
> rnf (Var x) = rnf x
>
> the actual datatype doesn't have fancy stuff like higher-order
> types
Hello,
actually I don't know if I can. I totally wouldn't mind but this is
mainly my co-author work and I don't know if he would (I suppose not but
since he is sleeping right now I can't check). However let's assume it's
a deBruijn representation for instance, I can tell you the scheme I
used:
da
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Paul Brauner wrote:
> Does anyone have an idea why calling rnf before the bench
> doesn't seem to "cache" the result as calling show does?
> (my instances of NFData follow the scheme described in strictbench
> documentation).
Is it possible you could show us your
Excerpts from Paul Brauner's message of Wed Mar 31 03:17:02 -0400 2010:
> The part I want to benchmark is 2. In particular I would like that:
>
> a. \x.t is already evaluated when I run 2 (I don't want to measure the
> performances of the generator)
> b. the action of substituting u for x in
Hello,
I'm writing a library for dealing with binders and I want to benchmark
it against DeBruijn, Locally Nameless, HOAS, etc.
One on my benchmark consists in
1. generating a big term \x.t
2. substituting u fox in t
The part I want to benchmark is 2. In particular I would like that:
a.
