[Haskell-cafe] Announce: EnumMap-0.0.1

[Thomas DuBuisson]

Inflating the number of elements in the test, I see:

IntMap
inserts: 5.3 seconds
lookups: 2.0 seconds

EnumMap
inserts: 6.1 sec (15% slower)
lookups: 2.5 sec (25% slower)

EnumMap with SPECIALIZE of:
{-# SPECIALIZE join :: Prefix -> EnumMap Int a -> Prefix -> EnumMap
Int a -> EnumMap Int a #-}
{-# SPECIALIZE lookup :: Int -> EnumMap Int a -> Maybe a #-}
{-# SPECIALIZE lookupN :: Nat -> EnumMap Int a -> Maybe a #-}
{-# SPECIALIZE insert :: Int -> a -> EnumMap Int a -> EnumMap Int a #-}
inserts: 5.3 seconds (dead on)
lookups: 2.6 seconds (owch!)

Additionally specializing the functions used in lookup{,N} doesn't
help.  I tried inlining (via INLINE) a couple things but that only
made performance notably worse.


Thomas

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 8:29 PM, John Van Enk<vanenkj at gmail.com> wrote:
> How bad is the lookup compared to normal?
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Thomas
> DuBuisson<thomas.dubuisson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Felipe Lessa<felipe.lessa at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 04:14:15PM -0700, Thomas DuBuisson wrote:
>>>> There exists a small but measurable performance hit for at least one
>>>> test case (using Int as keys, obviously).  Perhaps the bias would be
>>>> the other way if we were comparing EnumMap to an IntMap wrapped with
>>>> to/from Enum.
>>>
>>> Perhaps some SPECIALIZE pragmas would help here.
>>>
>>
>> Actually I tried that by adding SPECIALIZE to insert, insertN and
>> lookup.  it seemed to make the insert benchmark competitive but not
>> lookup.
>>
>> Thomas
>> _______________________________________________
>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>>
>