Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
Hello John, Saturday, February 21, 2009, 1:33:12 AM, you wrote: Don't forget jhc: i was pretty sure that jhc will be as fast as gcc :) unfortunately, jhc isn't our production compiler -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
On 20 Feb 2009, at 23:44, Bulat Ziganshin wrote: Hello John, Saturday, February 21, 2009, 1:33:12 AM, you wrote: Don't forget jhc: i was pretty sure that jhc will be as fast as gcc :) unfortunately, jhc isn't our production compiler Why not? There's nothing stopping you from choosing any Haskell compiler you like. If jhc gives you the performance you need – use it. Bob___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:52:27PM +0100, Thomas Davie wrote: On 20 Feb 2009, at 23:44, Bulat Ziganshin wrote: Hello John, Saturday, February 21, 2009, 1:33:12 AM, you wrote: Don't forget jhc: i was pretty sure that jhc will be as fast as gcc :) unfortunately, jhc isn't our production compiler Why not? There's nothing stopping you from choosing any Haskell compiler you like. If jhc gives you the performance you need – use it. 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. :) John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
Hello John, Saturday, February 21, 2009, 2:49:25 AM, you 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 -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc
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 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. there is one problem with haskell - it doesn't support variables and complex control structures. this means that sometimes you need to wrote more complex code to handle situation and as a result, it may be slower than native C -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
