Dear GHC developers,
Long ago you wrote that GHC has made Integer only about 3/2 times
slower than Int.
I tested this once, and then all this time I have been relying on this.
Now, with
ghc-6.4.1 compiled for Linux - i386-unknown,
running under Debian
By my previous letter about cost(Integer)/cost(Int) = 2.55
I wanted to ask
is there anything new in ghc-6.4.1 in comparison to, say,
ghc-5.01, to ghc-4, with relation to this cost ratio?
Regards,
-
Serge Mechveliani
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 14:32 +0400, Serge D. Mechveliani wrote:
Dear GHC developers,
Long ago you wrote that GHC has made Integer only about 3/2 times
slower than Int.
I tested this once, and then all this time I have been relying on this.
Now, with
ghc-6.4.1 compiled
Hi David,
For a while hoogle used to parse iface files with some Perl, its in
the hoogle repo under data/hihoo. It was particularly unreliable, but
might give some insights...
And there probably shouldn't be one, if people want it then use the
GHC API. Rather than defining a weak text format,
A more clever representation of Integer could unbox numbers in big
range.
But that would require some runtime support, I think.
-- Lennart
On Jul 31, 2006, at 11:19 , Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 14:32 +0400, Serge D. Mechveliani wrote:
Dear GHC developers,
Long ago
However because Int is often unboxable where as Integer is never
unboxable there are certainly programs where the factor is much much
greater than x2 or x3. If the Int can be unboxed into an Int# then the
operations are very quick indeed as they are simple machine
primitives.
This has made
