Re: New InstallShield
I didn't know the windows port of GHC used mingwin, that is great news. Does that mean it is possible to generate stand alone applications for Windows ? Yes; it always has been! Would it be hard to configure GHC to work with the mingwin crosscompiler on Linux ? It would be great to have a crosscompiling GHC. Not a clue. I'd be delighted to hear about this. I suspect the build system would need ironing out somewhat, but in theory ./configure --target=i386-unknown-mingw32 ought to do something sensible. -- http://sc3d.org/rrt/ | plagiarism, n. the mind burgles ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
PrimIO
Quick poll: Is anyone still using the PrimIO type and combinators from GlaExts? It's high time we removed them. In fact, there's nothing in this module that isn't either deprecated or can be got from somewhere else. I think GlaExts will be deprecated in the next release. Cheers, Simon ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Bagley shootout. Was: Lightningspeed haskell
I notice that the reverse file program, while concise, is quite slow. The program in its entirety is: main = interact $ unlines . reverse . lines Any thoughts on why its time is 5.68 seconds, vs 3.56 for tcl, 2 for perl, 0.19 for gcc, 0.18 for ocaml; and how it might be sped up? Is the lack of speed all in the stdio I/O? Is there a way to tell which benchmarks have no haskell entry? John Atwood -- Josef Svenningsson wrote: Hi all. Some days ago someone posted this url: http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/ which is a page benchmarking a number of different languages and compilers where ghc is one of them. Some benchmarks lacked a haskell versions (and some still do) and so I decided to fill in some of the gaps. One benchmark turned out to give pretty remarkable results. It's the producer/consumer benchmark. I suggest you all take a look at it. The haskell version is six (SIX!!!) times faster than the c version. Hey, what's going on here? I would really like to hear some comments from our dear implementors. It should be noted that synchronisation is achieved by using slightly different kinds of primitives. But still... six times... I lift my hat of for the ghc-implementors. /Josef ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
RE: Bagley shootout. Was: Lightningspeed haskell
A String is a [Char] and a Char is a heap object. So a file represented as a string takes a massive 20 bytes/char (12 for the cons cell, 8 for the Char cell). Then it's all sucked through several functions. It's entirely possible, though, that the biggest performance hit is in the I/O itself. We'd be happy if anyone wanted to invesigate and improve. Simon | -Original Message- | From: John Atwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] | Sent: 02 March 2001 01:12 | To: Josef Svenningsson | Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: Bagley shootout. Was: Lightningspeed haskell | | | I notice that the reverse file program, while concise, is quite slow. | The program in its entirety is: | main = interact $ unlines . reverse . lines | | Any thoughts on why its time is 5.68 seconds, vs 3.56 for tcl, 2 for | perl, 0.19 for gcc, 0.18 for ocaml; and how it might be sped | up? Is the | lack of speed all in the stdio I/O? | | Is there a way to tell which benchmarks have no haskell entry? | | John Atwood | -- | | Josef Svenningsson wrote: | | Hi all. | | Some days ago someone posted this url: | http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/ | | which is a page benchmarking a number of different languages and | compilers where ghc is one of them. Some benchmarks lacked a haskell | versions (and some still do) and so I decided to fill in | some of the gaps. | | One benchmark turned out to give pretty remarkable results. It's the | producer/consumer benchmark. I suggest you all take a look | at it. The | haskell version is six (SIX!!!) times faster than the c | version. Hey, | what's going on here? I would really like to hear some | comments from our | dear implementors. | | It should be noted that synchronisation is achieved by using | slightly different kinds of primitives. But still... six times... | | I lift my hat of for the ghc-implementors. | | /Josef | | | ___ | Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users | | | | ___ | Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users | ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
