[Haskell-cafe] speed: ghc vs gcc vs jhc

John Meacham john at repetae.net
Fri Feb 20 19:42:24 EST 2009

On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 03:21:03AM +0300, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
> >> what is "substantial size"? can jhc be used for video codec, i.e.
> >> probably no extensions - just raw computations, and thousands or tens
> >> of thousands LOCs?
> > Perhaps. A bigger issue in practice is that the larger a program is, the
> > more likely it is to depend on some library that depends on a ghc
> > extension.
> this is true for *application* code, but for codec you may have lots of
> code that just compute, compute, compute

Yes indeed. If there is code like this out there for haskell, I would
love to add it as a test case for jhc. I don't see a reason it wouldn't
compile to be as fast as C, with the caveat that the strictness analyzer
needs to be able to find all the unboxables. It sometimes needs some
help with well placed 'seq' statements, but that is true of ghc as well.
jhc does suffer a lot more than ghc though when it can't make things strict. 


John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list