Feedback request: priority queues in containers

Simon Marlow marlowsd at
Thu Mar 18 06:53:38 EDT 2010

On 17/03/2010 16:48, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Louis Wasserman
> <wasserman.louis at>  wrote:
>> I'd concur, but I haven't been able to install Criterion yet.  =(
>> Let me rewrite things with BenchPress, and see what happens.
> As the author of BenchPress I'd encourage you to use Criterion as
> BenchPress was written to benchmark medium size I/O actions (such as
> HTTP requests) and not (small) pure computations.
>> I should add, though, that I think C *is* as optimized as D.  In particular,
>> some of the tricks that worked with D only worked because of the way the
>> spines were arranged.  (For instance, unrolling the children incrementally
>> was a trick that really worked because the children and the trees in the
>> spine were lined up, which meant that it needed the Skip combinator.)
>> Simon: I wasn't sure what to do there, because e.g. Data.Map, I think, is
>> strict that way.  I prefer the lazy way, though, so I certainly don't mind
>> keeping it lazy =)
> Simon, we really need a good concurrent benchmark for this stuff as
> most (all) of the data types in containers are strict in the spine.

I know.  I'll try to get to this sometime.  In the meantime just 
optimise for sequential performance, and don't add strictness just for 
the sake of it.


More information about the Libraries mailing list