[Haskell-cafe] Language Shootout reverse-complement benchmark

[Louis Wasserman]

On a similar note, there was no parallelized implementation for
spectral-norm, even though Haskell had been doing rather well on the
single-core benchmark.  Heh.

Louis Wasserman
wasserman.louis at gmail.com
http://profiles.google.com/wasserman.louis


On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Gwern Branwen <gwern0 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 10:25 AM, David Leimbach <leimy2k at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm still trying to figure out what the point of the shootout really is.
>  If
> > there's no dedicated folks working with a language there, trying to make
> > things run faster, a language will come out looking inefficient
> potentially.
> >  There's a lot of compile flags and optimizations that can make a
> difference
> > in probably all of the languages listed on that page.
>
> 'Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made.'
>
> > I guess all you can get from the shootout is a sense of what a particular
> > language or set of tools is capable of in the hands of the programmers
> who
> > submit implementations.  It doesn't really give you a concrete idea as to
> > how to evaluate a programming language.
> > It does still seem kind of fun for some reason though :-)
> > Dave
>
> The Shootout has a number of valuable purposes:
>
> 1) Concrete evidence that language X *can*, somehow, be as fast as language
> Y
> 2) Public examples of techniques to do #1, again concrete
> 3) Exposes where libraries/compilers can do better (this has happened
> many times with GHC and Haskell libraries)
> 4) Motivates people to work on creating/fixing #2 and #3
>
> --
> gwern
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20100601/72d59d28/attachment.html