On 16/07/07, Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Sebastian,
Sunday, July 15, 2007, 9:05:14 PM, you wrote:
> As we've demonstrated there's nothing stopping you from writing
> imperative "C-like" algorithms in Haskell (just like C#), and there
> certainly wasn't any major performance difference
as Donald mentioned, this test is just limited by cache speed, not by
speed of code generated.
But wouldn't you say that in general, if you spend the effort you can
write low-level imperative algorithms in Haskell that perform
reasonably well? Especially compared to e.g. C#? I think your own
libraries demonstrate this!
I'm not saying it's as convenient (see the recent thread about "monad
splices") to write low-level imperative code in Haskell, but using
laziness in C# was hardly a walk on the beach either!
So my point is that Haskell isn't geared towards low-level
optimizations and performance, but in the few places where you do need
it, you *can* get it (IMO for only moderately more inconvenience than
you pay for *everything* in a low-level imperative language). Whereas
C# is a bit the other way around (easy to modify state, inconvenient
to write high-level/lazy/concurrent/etc. code), though something like
C is even more the other way around.
--
Sebastian Sylvan
+44(0)7857-300802
UIN: 44640862
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
