Thanks !
Il giorno Mar 28, 2007, alle ore 12:04 AM, Tim Chevalier ha scritto:
On 3/27/07, Jeremy Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At Tue, 27 Mar 2007 23:10:21 +0200,
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
> If someone has an idea on how else I can improve timings please
tell me.
I believe you are seeing a speed decrease, because GHC is not
inlining
functions as much when you split them into modules. If you add
explicit inline statements, I think you should be able to get back to
your original timings.
It could be inlining or it could be other optimizations. From the data
the OP gives, I don't think it's possible to conclude which ones.
I did longer runs (all compiled with -O2 as before) with the same
results.
and indeed with a couple of {-# INLINE function #-} I was able to
recover the previous performance and actually even get a better
performace than before.
Thanks!
An interesting thing is that the profiler actully was saying that the
non inlined version (and for the matter also the the split version)
were faster than the inlined or single module versions.
It would seem that the profiling ovehead for the inlined functions
are not correctly accounted for, so that they appear as more
expensive than the plain version when profiling.
Fawzi
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
