On 31/10/2007, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > goalieca: > > So in a few years time when GHC has matured we can expect performance to > > be on par with current Clean? So Clean is a good approximation to peak > > performance? > > > > The current Clean compiler, for micro benchmarks, seems to be rather > good, yes. Any slowdown wrt. the same program in Clean could be > considered a bug in GHC... > > And remember usually Haskell is competing against 'high level' languages > like python for adoption, where we're 5-500x faster anyway...
Not so sure about that last thing. I'd love to use Haskell for performance, in other words use it because it makes it easier to write parallel and concurrent programs (NDP and STM mainly, though I wouldn't mind some language support for message passing, and perhaps Sing#-style static protocol specifications, with some high degree of inference). Anyway, in order for that to be reasonable I think it's important that even the sequential code (where actual data dependencies enforce evaluation sequence) runs very quickly, otherwise we'll lose out to some C-based language (written with 10x the effort) again when we start bumping into the wall of Almdahls law... -- Sebastian Sylvan +44(0)7857-300802 UIN: 44640862 _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
