bit sets in IntSet vs. Integer

[Carter Schonwald]

Show me the efficient simd code in the gmp  c code base first :)

On Sunday, June 19, 2016, David Feuer <david.feuer at gmail.com> wrote:

> How does that excuse an inefficient implementation of Bits Integer?
> On Jun 19, 2016 6:58 PM, "Carter Schonwald" <carter.schonwald at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','carter.schonwald at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Did you read the code for the underlying gmp c code? And associated c
>> APIs?
>>
>> I'm told that part of the value of the new style gmp binding is that it
>> should be safer to link to any missing gmp functionality you may wish to
>> use.
>>
>> On Sunday, June 19, 2016, Henning Thielemann <
>> lemming at henning-thielemann.de
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','lemming at henning-thielemann.de');>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 19 Jun 2016, David Feuer wrote:
>>>
>>> Your quick look is insufficient. There are custom implementations of bit
>>>> setting and clearing operations that use GMP primitives instead of the
>>>> Data.Bits defaults.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have seen them, but the expensive operations like 'union' and
>>> 'difference' are not optimized, right? They would benefit from CPU vector
>>> instructions.
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20160619/f66e1ff1/attachment.html>