[Haskell] The speed, size and dependability of programming
lists at qseep.net
Tue Jun 2 19:22:46 EDT 2009
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Paul Johnson <paul at cogito.org.uk> wrote:
> Lyle Kopnicky wrote:
>> I think it's a combination of 1) the expressiveness measure is too
>> simplistic, measuring number of lines alone, or counting comments, and 2)
>> the problem set is skewed toward number-crunching, which is not (say)
>> Prolog's strong suit.
> Also there is a strong tendency to optimise the code for performance rather
> than conciseness (concision?). In the past this tended to bloat (e.g.)
> Haskell entries as simple intuitive code was replaced by arrays of unboxed
> integers and similar C-like constructs.
Well, they're supposedly measuring performance as well. If concise Haskell
is non-performant, and performant Haskell is verbose, this ought to be
reflected in the charts. But it managed to perform pretty well in both. I
don't think Haskell got short shrift in this analysis. Perhaps other
languages suffered a more "written verbosely for performance" problem.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell