[Haskell-cafe] #haskell works
dons at galois.com
Sat Dec 15 14:57:02 EST 2007
> Neil Mitchell wrote:
> >I agree with Bulat that Haskell has, if anything, even better
> >optimisation potential than something like C. With Haskell you can do
> >the crazy high-level optimisations that things like C would demand
> >really advanced alias-analysis. Compare this to low-level
> >optimisations which in Haskell require strictness analysis but in C
> >are easy. At some point high-level will become more important than
> >low-level, when it does, we win :-)
> I had this conversation where Mr C++ basically said that my code
> implements 3 loops and it's "not possible" to optimise that into just 1
> loop like the C program is doing. Then I (or rather, Don) demonstrated
> that the stream fusion library *has* optimised it into just 2 loops.
> (Apparently the library isn't 100% complete as yet.)
Right, we haven't bothered with streaming versions of 'words'.
However, the maximumBy and map happily fuse into a single loop.
> Hmm, perhaps to really show this off, we need a more complicated
> program. Something that would be just too hard to implement as 1 loop in
> C, but is easy for the GHC optimiser to build. I shall meditate on this
Do you have the single loop C program, btw? I'd be curious to see if
this is really "feasible". It would have to do the buffering, tokenising
and accumulating in one go. I'd imagine it is a bit hairy.
And, it should not significantly outperform, say, a bytestring version.
If it does, I'd like to see that.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe