> "Ch. A. Herrmann" wrote:
> > I believe that if as much research were spent on Haskell compilation as
> > on C compilation, Haskell would outperform C.
Unless I've got a dramatically distorted view of the amount of research
that goes on for imperative vs functional languages, and C vs haskell it
seems that they get, to an order of magnitude, the same amount of
research. Haskell doesn't do as well as C in spite of this because
compiling a functional program to run on well on current hardware is much
harder than compiling C to run well on current hardware. From my
understanding this is because to do well for Haskell like languages
requires deducing run-time behaviour from a program that abstracts away
from it (eg figuring update analysis, fold-build
transformation,etc) whereas C programs are have much more of this done by
the person writing the program. Of course, that's why the C is likely to
be less adaptable than the Haskell, which is why all Right-Thinking
Programmers (TM) think Haskell is a better programming vehicle :-)
___cheers,_dave________________________________________________________
www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~tweed/pi.htm|ALERT: you are communicating with an
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |unsavoury individual with a copy of gdb
work tel: (0117) 954-5253 |who reverse-engineered a file format.
