simonmarhaskell: > Malcolm Wallace wrote: > >Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>What would be v helpful would be a regression suite aimed at > >>performance, that benchmarked GHC (and perhaps other Haskell > >>compilers) against a set of programs, regularly, and published the > >>results on a web page, highlighting regressions. > > > >Something along these lines already exists - the nobench suite. > > darcs get http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/code/nobench > >It originally compared ghc, ghci, hugs, nhc98, hbc, and jhc. > >(Currently the results at > > http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/nobench.html > >compare only variations of ghc fusion rules.) > > > >I have just been setting up my own local copy - initial results at > > http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/fp/nobench/powerpc/results.html > >where I intend to compare ghc from each of the 6.4, 6.6 and 6.8 > >branches, against nhc98 and any other compilers I can get working. > >I have powerpc, intel, and possibly sparc machines available. > > That's great. BTW, GHC has a performance bug affecting calendar at the > moment: > > http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/1168 > > The best GHC options for this program might therefore be -O2 > -fno-state-hack. Or perhaps just -O0. > > >>Like Hackage, it should be easy to add a new program. > > > >Is submitting a patch against the darcs repo sufficiently easy? > >Should we move the master darcs repo to somewhere more accessible, like > >code.haskell.org? > > Yes, please do. When I have a chance I'd like to help out.
Malcolm, can you just take the darcs repo, and move it to code.haskell.org? -- Don _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe