| The head has -dsuppress-coercions which omits coercion terms when pretty
| printing Core. It would be easy to backport that to 6.12.
The HEAD also has a coercion optimiser that dramatically shrinks some large
coercion terms.
| > I might revert both mwc-random and statistics back to using plain
On 11/07/2010, at 22:49, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 12:59 AM, Dan Doel wrote:
>
>> You're using GHC 6.12.x presumably?
>
> That's right.
>
>> There are known performance problems with
>> using abstract PrimMonads in that version (and, actually, just using IO as
>> well
l.org
Subject: Re: Massive slowdown in mwc-random after switching to use of primitive
package
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Bryan O'Sullivan
mailto:b...@serpentine.com>> wrote:
I can probably cook up a smaller repro than Dan, since I depend on neither
package for a standalone test
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
>
> I can probably cook up a smaller repro than Dan, since I depend on neither
> package for a standalone test case. Let me get cracking on it promptly, and
> I'll file a ticket later.
>
I filed http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
wrote:
> Well, fewer dependencies make it much easier to test and reproduce. But
> something concrete is certainly better than nothing. Please submit a Trac
> ticket. (Worth checking with Roman -- perhaps he already has?)
>
I can probably coo
]
| Sent: 12 July 2010 01:56
| To: Simon Peyton-Jones
| Cc: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: Massive slowdown in mwc-random after switching to use of
| primitive package
|
| On Sunday 11 July 2010 1:31:23 pm Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| > This is the first I've heard of this.
On Sunday 11 July 2010 1:31:23 pm Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> This is the first I've heard of this. Do you have a test case that shows
> up the problem? Then we can put it in the regression tests so it won't go
> wrong again.
That depends on what dependencies you're willing to accept. I think al
| > caused a huge performance regression.
|
| You're using GHC 6.12.x presumably? There are known performance problems with
| using abstract PrimMonads in that version (and, actually, just using IO as
| well).
...
| The good news is that, last I checked, this isn't a problem in HEAD. The
|
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 12:59 AM, Dan Doel wrote:
>
> You're using GHC 6.12.x presumably?
That's right.
> There are known performance problems with
> using abstract PrimMonads in that version (and, actually, just using IO as
> well).
Ah, that's a shame. I'm surprised it would be affecting I
On Saturday 10 July 2010 2:09:48 pm Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> Recently, I switched the mwc-random package (
> http://hackage.haskell.org/package/mwc-random) over from running in the ST
> monad to using your primitive package. I didn't notice initially, but this
> caused a huge performance regressio
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> If you could shed any light, I'd be most grateful, as this has me a bit
> confounded.
>
As a further data point, the attached patch replaces uses of PrimMonad with
ST, and speeds performance back to 0.015 seconds, so it's clearly the use
Hi, Roman —
Recently, I switched the mwc-random package (
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/mwc-random) over from running in the ST
monad to using your primitive package. I didn't notice initially, but this
caused a huge performance regression.
mwc-random 0.4.1.1 uses ST internally, and runs the
12 matches
Mail list logo
