Never mind. I screwed up the timings. The new haskell timings are still a huge improvement but they are:
-0.169075164 -0.169031665 real 0m27.196s user 0m19.688s sys 0m0.163s On Nov 27, 2007 11:25 AM, Ryan Dickie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oops forgot to hit reply-to-all.. resending.. > > > N-body is looking good. I am running and amd64 3000+ on ghc 6.8.1. The > debian shootout is showing a huge gap between ghc 6.6 and g++ but I am not > seeing that gap. One concern though is that the code doesn't look very > "haskellish". So much pointer manip. > > For the nbody c++ code I am getting: > -0.169075164 > -0.169031665 > > real 0m11.168s > user 0m10.891s > sys 0m0.043s > > and for the nbody haskell code I am getting: > -0.169075164 > -0.169031665 > > real 0m11.595s > user 0m11.422s > sys 0m0.044s > > > On Nov 26, 2007 8:21 PM, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > s.clover: > > > In some spare time over the holidays I cooked up three shootout > > > entries, for Fasta, the Meteor Contest, and Reverse Complement. I > > > > Yay! > > > > > First up is the meteor-contest entry. > > > > > > http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php? > > > test=meteor&lang=ghc&id=5 > > > > > > This is the clear win of the bunch, with significantly improved time > > > thanks to its translation of the better algorithm from Clean. > > > > Well done! Though looks like we'll have to follow the C++ implementation > > > > to be really competitive. > > > > > Next is reverse-complement. > > > > > > http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php ? > > > test=revcomp&lang=ghc&id=3 > > > > Very good. I'm glad someone looked at that, since the old code was > > moderately naive (first bytestring effort). > > > > > Finally, there's fasta. > > > > > > http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php? > > > test=fasta&lang=ghc&id=2 > > > > Yeah, we should do something better here. Hmm. > > > > > p.s. It looks like they've depreciated chameneos in favor of a new > > > version, chameneos-redux. As this was one of the places Haskell > > > really rocked the competition, it would probably be worth updating > > > > Definitely. I note also we're beating Erlang on the new thread-ring > > benchmark too, > > > > > > http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=threadring&lang=all > > > > > the Haskell entry for the new benchmark. Also, the n-bodies benchmark > > > seems like another that could be much improved. > > > > Yeah, that's a hard one. > > > > -- Don > > _______________________________________________ > > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe