Malte Milatz <malte <at> gmx-topmail.de> writes: > > See the following link for a purely functional and straight-forward > implementation of SHA1. Disclaimer: Please be kind to me, I haven't > done much Haskell (yet). And I know nothing about SHA1 except its > specification. > > http://hpaste.org/1695#a2 > > It performs better than the SHA1 algorithm in Crypto: It is faster by a > factor of approximately e. It is also competitive (regarding time) > with the »unsafe« SHA1 implementation posted here some days ago,
Great. Can you post some timings? > although it uses considerably more memory. Of course, you may safely Does it have a space leak or does it run in constant but larger space than the other versions? > forget it if you're interested in performance near a C implementation > such as GNU sha1sum. > I don't think it's unreasonable to think we could get near to C performance and we've been getting closer. > I'd heartily welcome any comments or suggestions for improvement, as > well as benchmark results, especially if they differ from mine. I'm > using the standard ghc -O2, by the way. For me it will have to wait until next weekend at the very earliest but I hope your post sparks some interest in the meantime. Dominic. PS I had a 5 minute (well actually less) look at the code and it doesn't look dissimilar to other versions I've seen in Haskell. I wonder if the speedup is principally because of ByteString. PPS We have to put splitn in a library. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
