[Haskell-cafe] Haskell vs GC'd imperative languages, threading, parallelizeability (is that a word? :-D )

Hugh Perkins hughperkins at gmail.com
Fri Aug 10 04:51:49 EDT 2007

Well, managed to shave 25% of C# execution time by writing my own bit
array.  For now, I will concede that, under the conditions of the shoot,
bitarrays in c# are slower than bitarrays in Haskell.  I'll let you know if
I get any new ideas on this.

Getting back to the original problem, which is: threading.  Donald, one of
the things that is very interesting about Haskell is it's potential for
automatic threading, ie you write a trivial algorithm that looks like it
runs in a single thread, and the runtime splits it across multiple cores

It's fairly safe to say that maps, foldrs, foldls, and their derivatives are
safe to parallelize?  (For example, hand-waving argument, a foldr of (/) on
[1,5,7,435,46,2] can be split into a foldr on [1,5,7] and a foldr on
[435,46,2], then their results combined).

To what extent is the technology you are using in your algorithm
parallizable?  (I actually cant tell, it's a genuine question).  In the case
that it is parallelizable, to what extent is it trivial for a runtime to
know this?  (Again, I dont have enough information to tell)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20070810/6d8143de/attachment.htm

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list