----- Original Message -----
From: Ketil Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jan Brosius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; S.D.Mechveliani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: speed of compiled Haskell code.
> "Jan Brosius" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> But this example task was chosen as unlucky for Haskell.
> >> In other, average case, I expect the ratio of 6-10.
>
> > This seems that Haskell cannot be considered as a language for real
> > world applications but merely as a toy for researchers .
>
> Yeah. Let's just lump Haskell in with Perl, Python, Java, Lisp and
> all those other toy languages, completely useless in the "real world".
>
> The only argument against Haskell's performance that IMHO carries
> any real weight, is that GHC is dog slow as a compiler[0]. No other
> Haskell programs I've used or written[1] have been slow enough for me
NO, NO and NO , please read only what I have written. E.g. I believe that
Ocaml is certainly not toy language, it gives as
far as people have communicated to me fast compact native code.
My question about the speed of Haskell is not meant to upset people. On the
contrary Haskell does attract me by its elegance.
I just wanted to know what to expect of the code produced. I thought some
people could give me some honest answers
about it. Recent (really recent ) benchmarks are not available ont the
Haskell website as far as I know
Friendly
Jan Brosius (a lazy wanting to use Haskell )
> to notice it.
>
> -kzm
>
> [0] almost as bad as Microsoft's C++ compiler, imagine that.
> [1] admittedly not many. Are people using Haskell having problems
> getting good enough performance? Enough to regret choosing it as a
> language? (This is not a rhetoric question!)
> --
> If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
>
