Summary of containers patches

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljenovic at gmail.com
Fri Sep 24 01:07:46 EDT 2010


On 24 September 2010 14:58, Don Stewart <dons at galois.com> wrote:
> ivan.miljenovic:
>> On 24 September 2010 14:36, Michael Snoyman <michael at snoyman.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Don Stewart <dons at galois.com> wrote:
>> >> Perhaps a containers-inline fork is needed, for those who still need the speed.
>> >
>> > Would it be possible to use CPP to turn the INLINE flags into a
>> > compile-time argument, ie:
>> >
>> > #ifdef INLINE
>> > {-# INLINE #-}
>> > #endif
>>
>> Since containers ships with GHC, wouldn't this then require an extra
>> flag being used when building GHC to enable this?
>>
>> And then to use it, you'd have to build your own GHC rather than using
>> a pre-built binary like just about everyone does...
>>
>> > I'd hate to start seeing incompatible Data.Map.Maps floating around.
>>
>> Agreed.  At the very least if there was a fork it would presumably
>> have to be in a different module namespace to avoid namespace
>> collisions, which would make the incompatability obvious.
>
> We're talking about a 3% increase in the size of the Map, a 2% size in
> the Map.hs benchmark binary, right?
>
> For a 50% increase in Map function performance.

I'm not arguing against it; I'm just arguing against whether or not a
fork would be beneficial.

-- 
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Ivan.Miljenovic at gmail.com
IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com


More information about the Libraries mailing list