Forget it, my bad.
On 20 Feb 2009, at 16:48, Miguel Mitrofanov wrote:
Ahem. Seems like you've included time spent on the runtime loading.
My results:
MigMit:~ MigMit$ gcc -o test -O3 -funroll-loops test.c && time ./test
-1243309312
real 0m0.066s
user 0m0.063s
sys 0m0.002s
MigMit:~ MigMit$ rm test; ghc -O2 --make test.hs && time ./test
Linking test ...
-243309312
real 0m3.201s
user 0m3.165s
sys 0m0.017s
While 3.201 vs. 0.066 seem to be a huge difference, 0.017 vs. 0.002
is not that bad.
On 20 Feb 2009, at 16:29, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello haskell-cafe,
since there are no objective tests comparing ghc to gcc, i made my
own
one. these are 3 programs, calculating sum in c++ and haskell:
main = print $ sum[1..10^9::Int]
main = print $ sum0 (10^9) 0
sum0 :: Int -> Int -> Int
sum0 0 !acc = acc
sum0 !x !acc = sum0 (x-1) (acc+x)
main()
{
int sum=0;
//for(int j=0; j<100;j++)
for(int i=0; i<1000*1000*1000;i++)
sum += i;
return sum;
}
execution times:
sum:
ghc 6.6.1 -O2 : 12.433 secs
ghc 6.10.1 -O2 : 12.792 secs
sum-fast:
ghc 6.6.1 -O2 : 1.919 secs
ghc 6.10.1 -O2 : 1.856 secs
ghc 6.10.1 -O2 -fvia-C : 1.966 secs
C++:
gcc 3.4.5 -O3 -funroll-loops: 0.062 secs
--
Best regards,
Bulat mailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
