Hey Matthew, One dimension of analsysis that would be instructive would be to characterize the differences in core / stg for these different versions
Also : am I correct in believing that these all are the exact same algorithm in terms of representation or am I overlooking some differences between the 3 different codes ? On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 4:07 PM Matthew Roberts <matthew.robe...@mq.edu.au> wrote: > My apologies, > > The link to the source was broken by some repo work - I have fixed it and > it should be stable now. This page was intended just to be a way of > showing the results to my collaborators, not a full explanation that anyone > can follow, but I thought the graphs at least show off what I am seeing. > > Regardless, it is all there in the code and hopefully not too obtuse. I > can improve the discussion on the page if enough people are interested :) > > Matt > > On 12 Feb 2019, at 5:14 AM, Carter Schonwald <carter.schonw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I'm looking at these links, but i'm actually having a hard time finding > the actual different definitions of this microbenchmark... > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 9:22 AM Richard Eisenberg <r...@cs.brynmawr.edu> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Feb 11, 2019, at 8:55 AM, Simon Peyton Jones <simo...@microsoft.com> >> wrote: >> >> What exactly is “the alternative compile-time implementation”? >> >> >> In my response, I interpreted this to be macro-expansion, the alternative >> we discuss in the paper. The paper includes a nice discussion of how the >> semantics differs between what we currently have and macro-expansion. >> >> Richard >> _______________________________________________ >> ghc-devs mailing list >> ghc-devs@haskell.org >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >> <https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/DjjUCK1DOrC8NwxohMgjBd?domain=mail.haskell.org> >> > >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs