[Haskell-cafe] Re: Hashtable woes

[Simon Marlow]

Brian Sniffen wrote:
> On 2/10/06, Ketil Malde <ketil.malde at bccs.uib.no> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hmm...perhaps it is worth it, then?  The benchmark may specify "hash
>>table", but I think it is fair to interpret it as "associative data
>>structure" - after all, people are using "associative arrays" that
>>(presumably) don't guarantee a hash table underneath, and it can be
>>argued that Data.Map is the canonical way to achieve that in Haskell.
> 
> 
> Based on this advice, I wrote a k-nucleotide entry using the rough
> structure of the OCaml entry, but with the manual IO from Chris and
> Don's "Haskell #2" entry.  It runs in under 4 seconds on my machine,
> more than ten times the speed of the fastest Data.HashTable entry.

I haven't been following this too closely, but could someone provide me 
with (or point me to) the badly performing Data.HashTable example, so we 
can measure our improvements?

Cheers,
	Simon