computer language shootout

[Miles Egan]

On Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 10:34:40AM -0700, brk@jenkon.com wrote:
> 	[Bryn Keller]  
> 	While this is absolutely true, and well worth remembering, GHC's
> performance is in some cases reasonably competitive, but in others is many
> times slower than Ocaml. For instance:
> 
> 	Times are C/Ocaml/GHC
> 
> 	Sum a Column of Integers:	0.73 / 0.99 / 9.98
> 	Array Access:				0.11/ 0.14 / 18.78
> 
> 	But there are also entries like:
> 
> 	Ackermann's Function		0.09 / 0.04 / 0.06
> 
> 	Where Ocaml and GHC were both *faster* than C, and GHC was quite
> close to Ocaml.
> 
> 	I'm just wondering why we can't get performance like (at least)
> Ocaml on all the tests, not just some.

So am I.  Have any haskell-performance gurus looked at any of the code?  Many of
the slowest entries are written in a very elegant, high-level style that is
probably also relatively slow.

-- 
miles

"We in the past evade X, where X is something which we believe to be a
lion, through the act of running." - swiftrain@geocities.com