On Sun, 2009-08-30 at 16:15 +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
> Hello Steve,
>
> Sunday, August 30, 2009, 3:54:53 PM, you wrote:
>
> > So it looks like Haskell is ~13 slower for IO than C/C++, even (I
> > assume) when using Data.ByteString or other speed-up tricks.
>
> it means that *your* program
Well, Steve wrote:
> I compared the top 10 C/C++ results against the top 10 Haskell results:
So to me it seems he's not talking about his code.
Anyway, I thought Haskell's ByteString IO should not be that much slower
anyway.
Not sure how lazy ByteString IO is implemented, but if it performs asyn
Hello Steve,
Sunday, August 30, 2009, 3:54:53 PM, you wrote:
> So it looks like Haskell is ~13 slower for IO than C/C++, even (I
> assume) when using Data.ByteString or other speed-up tricks.
it means that *your* program is 13x slower than C one and nothing
more. in particular, your program may
Hello Ketil,
Wednesday, September 13, 2006, 10:41:13 AM, you wrote:
> But a String is something like 8 or 12 bytes per character, a
> ByteString gets you down to 1.
12-16. Char itself, pointer to the next list element, and two boxes
around them - this count for 16 bytes on 32-bit CPU. but cells
Hello Daniel,
Monday, September 11, 2006, 6:05:38 PM, you wrote:
> The problem spec states that the input file contains about 500 test cases,
> each given by between 1 and 100,000 lines, each line containing a single word
> of between 2 and 1000 letters.
> So the file should be about 12.5G on ave
