On 20 Feb 2009, at 22:57, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello Don,
Saturday, February 21, 2009, 12:43:46 AM, you wrote:
gcc -O3 -funroll-loops 0.318
ghc "-funroll-loops" -D64 0.088
So what did we learn here?
nothing new: what you are not interested in real compilers comparison,
preferring to demonstrate artificial results
I'm not sure what you're getting at Bulat – it's been demonstrated
that ghc is slower than gcc for most cases at the moment (many
benchmarks will back this up), *however*, it's also easily verified
that ghc has had significantly less effort directed at it than gcc and
other imperative compilers, thus, there are many places it can improve
greatly.
In this case, you've pointed out a really great source of heavy
optimisation. Thanks a lot :) Now perhaps it might be an idea to be
constructive, rather than trying to stand like nelson going "HA HA" at
the people with the inferior compiler.
;)
Bob_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
