[Haskell] small boys performance

Johan Henriksson mahogny at areta.org
Wed Mar 14 12:38:19 EDT 2007

Andrzej Jaworski wrote:
> Hi Knights,
> As I regretfully pointed out earlier in [Fwd: Re: Computer Language
> Shootout]
> large search and simulations are not for Haskell. This is equally true with
> GHC 6.5 http://eric_rollins.home.mindspring.com/haskellAnt.html.
After checking the code I must say this is not convincing at all. The code
isn't optimized. That said, I think we can thank you for some
more code to compare the speed with ML once someone has tuned it :)

> Also there is much illusion about Haskell potential ease at handling
> mathematics. Yes Haskell is excellent for demonstration but trying to
> implement algorithms that would do trickier things is pretty tough. A thing
so far in my experience, it is the opposite. it takes a while to learn
to think in
the right way however.

> where Haskell could potentially offer something that a regular CAS cannot is
> calculating a tensors with symbolic indices (without components)
> so that one could have components calculated for specific cases on the end
> of general calculation. Perhaps somebody more technical than me could take
> the challenge? It could lure theoretical physicists into Haskell which might
> pay back. One of them has recently provided Curry with the fastest
> compiler:-)

More information about the Haskell mailing list