[Haskell] [Fwd: Re: Computer Language Shootout]

[Fawzi Mohamed]

I am new to haskell, but I find your assertions surprising, given  
that from my experience the really performance critical code is  
little, and the reset can be even interpreted.
As far as I know C/C++ or similar are not really that advanced with  
respect to whole program optimization (not much more than inlining).

I had the impression that haskell, until the shootout push, was not  
good at optimizing/had not optimized libraries for some common  
computational kernels, but now is in a much better shape (for ghc),  
and with Don is doing, hopefully it will stay so.

Can you corroborate a little more your points?

cheers
Fawzi
On Feb 26, 2007, at 3:43 AM, Andrzej Jaworski wrote:

> It sounds reasonable. However knowledge of how program performs in
> micro-steps does not add up, so the benchmarks may wet up appetite  
> for lunch
> that does not come. I have pointed into such example - an  
> astonishing and
> unexplained underperformance of Haskell with all the profiling  
> information
> at hand.
>
> I guess Haskell compilers are not particularly good at detecting  
> specific
> properties of a program and hence with optimizing it. This however  
> shows up
> with size so Donald's benchmarks cannot catch that out.
>
> For this reason, undiagnosed and untreated, Haskell has been  
> abandoned for
> example in Algebraic Dynamic Programming, in spite of its unparallel
> expressive power and a lot of hope. In ILP/IFP and GP it failed too.
>
> Cheers,
> --Andrzej
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell mailing list
> Haskell at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell