On 25 July 2005 10:07, Ketil Malde wrote:
> "Simon Marlow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> We're interested in performance issues with both GHC itself and
>> GHC-compiled code.
>
> I can think of a couple of things.
>
> One is the performance of Int64 (which unsurprisingly is inferior to
> Int(32) but more surprisingly, also to Integer). I've reported it
> previously, but can dig it up again, if desired.
Added to the list, thanks.
> The other is probably not as relevant, but I'll mention it anyway. I
> occasionally use rather large arrays, and UArrays can save a
> considerable amount of space. Sometimes, however, I want to store
> more complex structures than those UArrays are provided for. It seems
> to me that what I really want are *strict* arrays (which the compiler
> then can unbox automatically), and that these could be provided for
> any (single constructor) data type?
Manuel Chakravarty's flattened arrays are what you want; I'm not sure of
the implementation status though. Also, once we have associated types
it will be easier to do this (see the associated types paper for an
example).
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
