Another data point:
The bytestring 'break' rule fired fine for me (GHC 7.4.1 Linux x86-64).
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Kazu Yamamoto wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I seems to us (my friends and me) that term rewriting rules for
> ByteString are not fired in recent GHCs.
>
> 6.12.3OK
>
Hello,
I seems to us (my friends and me) that term rewriting rules for
ByteString are not fired in recent GHCs.
6.12.3OK
7.0.4 NG
7.4.1 NG
7.6.1RC1 NG
For example, with the example from this ticket
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/37
On 8/27/12 6:25 PM, J Baptist wrote:
Using ByteStrings and the C calls does indeed speed things up a bit, but not
much.
real0m6.053suser0m1.480ssys 0m4.550s
For your interest:The original version (with Strings and openFile):
http://hpaste.org/73803Faster (with Strings and c_open):
On 8/27/12 5:33 PM, Donn Cave wrote:
It does, but it can also read directly to Ptr Word8 (fdReadBuf), which
you'd think would be closer to hardware speed - but then you might lose
the advantage trying to peek the data out of the buffer. In principle
you ought to be able to stuff that pointer rig
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 3:25 PM, J Baptist wrote:
> The problem may be that even with ByteStrings, we are stuck using show,
> and thus Strings, at some point.
>
Wait, what are you actually trying to do? If you have a benchmark that's
half sane and half bonkers (cf. use of show), then yeah, it's
> From: felipe.le...@gmail.com
> Do these timings include RTS startup?
Yes, this is the result of the time command on the whole executable.
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
htt
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 7:25 PM, J Baptist wrote:
> real 0m6.053s
> user 0m1.480s
> sys 0m4.550s
Do these timings include RTS startup?
--
Felipe.
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/
Why are you using Show?
bytestring-show might be an option.
Remember: for speed, don't convert between String types.
Consider mmap-bytestring too.
On Monday, August 27, 2012, J Baptist wrote:
> Using ByteStrings and the C calls does indeed speed things up a bit, but
> not much.
>
> real 0m6.0
Using ByteStrings and the C calls does indeed speed things up a bit, but not
much.
real0m6.053suser0m1.480ssys 0m4.550s
For your interest:The original version (with Strings and openFile):
http://hpaste.org/73803Faster (with Strings and c_open):
http://hpaste.org/73802Even faster (wi
Quoth Johan Tibell ,
...
> Could you try using the Data.ByteString API. I don't have the code in
> front of me so I don't know if the System.Posix API uses Strings. If
> it does, that's most likely the issue.
It does, but it can also read directly to Ptr Word8 (fdReadBuf), which
you'd think would
In this vein, you may be interested in trying out the unix-bytestring
package (it contains ByteString based bindings for POSIX I/O - but
you'll still need the unix package to get at the underlying file
descriptor.)
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/unix-bytestring/0.3.5.4/doc/html/System
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 1:43 PM, J Baptist wrote:
> I'm looking into high-performance I/O, particularly on a tmpfs (in-memory)
> filesystem. This involves creating lots of little files. Unfortunately, it
> seems that Haskell's performance in this area is not comparable to that of
> C. I assume tha
I'm looking into high-performance I/O, particularly on a tmpfs (in-memory)
filesystem. This involves creating lots of little files. Unfortunately, it
seems that Haskell's performance in this area is not comparable to that of C. I
assume that this is because of the overhead involved in opening a
13 matches
Mail list logo
