Re: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
bulat.ziganshin: > Hello John, > > Saturday, February 21, 2009, 3:42:24 AM, you wrote: > > >> this is true for *application* code, but for codec you may have lots of > >> code that just compute, compute, compute > > > Yes indeed. If there is code like this out there for haskell, I would > > love to add it as a test case for jhc. > > Crypto library has a lot of native haskell code computing hashes and > encrypting data > > hopefully people will show other examples > > btw, Galois Cryptol has haskell backend, are you know? with jhс > compilation it can probably generate as fast code as C backend does. > it will be very interesting for us and even look as something close to > production usage. i have crossposted message to Don That's a very interesting idea. The output from Cryptol is self contained enough, and simple, numerical code, that JHC probably could handle it -- it doesn't require extensive libraries or runtime support, for example. This warrents investigation. Thanks for the suggestion! -- Don ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
But it is very misleading. It would be nice to have a log or something similar to inform about the current state ://repetae.net/computer/jhc/jhc.shtml > That is just there for historical reasons as my initial announcement. > > more up to date info is > > in the manual: http://repetae.net/computer/jhc/manual.html > the becoming a developer page: > http://repetae.net/computer/jhc/development.shtml > and the how do i just try it out page: > http://repetae.net/computer/jhc/building.shtml > > > I guess it isn't clear that that original document is no longer up to date. I > will put a big warning on it. > >John > > -- > John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ > ___ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 01:20:14AM +0100, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > John, > please update the section "All is not well in jhc-land" because now > things are better isn´t? Ah, are you refering to this page? http://repetae.net/computer/jhc/jhc.shtml That is just there for historical reasons as my initial announcement. more up to date info is in the manual: http://repetae.net/computer/jhc/manual.html the becoming a developer page: http://repetae.net/computer/jhc/development.shtml and the how do i just try it out page: http://repetae.net/computer/jhc/building.shtml I guess it isn't clear that that original document is no longer up to date. I will put a big warning on it. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 03:21:03AM +0300, Bulat Ziganshin wrote: > >> what is "substantial size"? can jhc be used for video codec, i.e. > >> probably no extensions - just raw computations, and thousands or tens > >> of thousands LOCs? > > > Perhaps. A bigger issue in practice is that the larger a program is, the > > more likely it is to depend on some library that depends on a ghc > > extension. > > this is true for *application* code, but for codec you may have lots of > code that just compute, compute, compute Yes indeed. If there is code like this out there for haskell, I would love to add it as a test case for jhc. I don't see a reason it wouldn't compile to be as fast as C, with the caveat that the strictness analyzer needs to be able to find all the unboxables. It sometimes needs some help with well placed 'seq' statements, but that is true of ghc as well. jhc does suffer a lot more than ghc though when it can't make things strict. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
John, please update the section "All is not well in jhc-land" because now things are better isn´t? 2009/2/21 John Meacham > > On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 02:24:59AM +0300, Bulat Ziganshin wrote: > > Hello John, > > > > Saturday, February 21, 2009, 2:14:25 AM, you wrote: > > > > > Heh. He probably meant something more like "jhc is not a production > > > compiler" which is true for a lot of projects. For projects of > > > substantial size or that require many extensions, jhc falls somewhat > > > short. It is getting better though. Of course, help is always > > > appreciated. :) > > > > what is "substantial size"? can jhc be used for video codec, i.e. > > probably no extensions - just raw computations, and thousands or tens > > of thousands LOCs? > > Perhaps. A bigger issue in practice is that the larger a program is, the > more likely it is to depend on some library that depends on a ghc > extension. However, base is almost 1 lines and jhc can compile that > into a library without too much effort nowadays, so it might scale. > If you try and find it fails, then please submit a bug report to > j...@haskell.org. Too many bugs go unreported I find. > > If the haskell code has an interface that is strict and unboxable (i.e. > only unboxable values passed, such as a video codec passing floats might > be) then compiling it with jhc and foreign exporting the functions then > foreign importing them into ghc for the bulk of the program would > probably work. Probably not worth the effort, but could be an > interesting experiment. > >JOhn > > -- > John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ > ___ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 02:24:59AM +0300, Bulat Ziganshin wrote: > Hello John, > > Saturday, February 21, 2009, 2:14:25 AM, you wrote: > > > Heh. He probably meant something more like "jhc is not a production > > compiler" which is true for a lot of projects. For projects of > > substantial size or that require many extensions, jhc falls somewhat > > short. It is getting better though. Of course, help is always > > appreciated. :) > > what is "substantial size"? can jhc be used for video codec, i.e. > probably no extensions - just raw computations, and thousands or tens > of thousands LOCs? Perhaps. A bigger issue in practice is that the larger a program is, the more likely it is to depend on some library that depends on a ghc extension. However, base is almost 1 lines and jhc can compile that into a library without too much effort nowadays, so it might scale. If you try and find it fails, then please submit a bug report to j...@haskell.org. Too many bugs go unreported I find. If the haskell code has an interface that is strict and unboxable (i.e. only unboxable values passed, such as a video codec passing floats might be) then compiling it with jhc and foreign exporting the functions then foreign importing them into ghc for the bulk of the program would probably work. Probably not worth the effort, but could be an interesting experiment. JOhn -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
Bulat Ziganshin writes: >> Don't forget jhc: > i was pretty sure that jhc will be as fast as gcc :) unfortunately, > jhc isn't our production compiler Neither is GCC :-) -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
Don't forget jhc: on my machine (with 'print' equivalent added to C one to be fair, and 10^9 changed to 1000*1000*1000 just like the C one) ghc: (-O2) time ./foo ./foo 2.26s user 0.00s system 99% cpu 2.273 total gcc: time ./a.out ./a.out 0.34s user 0.00s system 99% cpu 0.341 total jhc: time ./hs.out ./hs.out 0.33s user 0.00s system 96% cpu 0.347 total Yay! it is good to see my goal of C-equivalent performance starting to come true :) John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
