[Haskell] [Fwd: Re: Computer Language Shootout]
Donald Bruce Stewart
dons at cse.unsw.edu.au
Sun Feb 25 17:15:53 EST 2007
> * John Meacham:
> >> Clean has also declined in these benchmarks but not that much as Haskell.
> >> According to John van Groningen Clean's binary-trees program in the previous
> >> shootout version used lazy data structure which resulted in lower memory
> >> usage and much faster execution. That was removed by the maintainer of the
> >> shootout and replaced by a much slower one using strict data structure.
> > Why was this done?
> I suppose the itent of the binary-trees benchmark is to measure
> allocation performance in the presence of a fairly large (well, not in
> today's terms) data structure. Using laziness to prevent that data
> structure from being built (or use additional sharing) kind of defeats
> the purpose of the benchmark.
> Note that these are microbenchmarks, not real applications. Imposing
> such rules makes sense.
Agreed. I've submitted a strict variant that should allocate similarly
to OCaml. I'd suggest stating this requirement for strict allocation in
More information about the Haskell