On 29/03/2010, at 02:27, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
Does anything change if you swap the first two rhss?
No, not as far as I can tell.
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Roman Leshchinskiy r...@cse.unsw.edu.au
wrote:
On 28/03/2010, at 09:47, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
It's important to
Does anything change if you swap the first two rhss?
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Roman Leshchinskiy r...@cse.unsw.edu.au
wrote:
On 28/03/2010, at 09:47, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
It's important to switch from mod to rem. This can be done by a
simple abstract interpretation.
Also,
Hi John,
Any chance of seeing the benchmark? You're not the only one with an
optimising compiler tucked away somewhere :-)
I have one benchmark where I outperform GHC by 21 times, although
saying it's artificial is a bit of an understatement...
Thanks, Neil
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 6:27 PM,
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 3:25 AM, Neil Mitchell ndmitch...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi John,
Any chance of seeing the benchmark? You're not the only one with an
optimising compiler tucked away somewhere :-)
Neil, for some reason John's reply didn't thread with the rest of the
thread. Probably
John Meacham wrote:
Here are jhc's timings for the same programs on my machine. gcc and ghc
both used -O3 and jhc had its full standard optimizations turned on.
jhc:
./hs.out 5.12s user 0.07s system 96% cpu 5.380 total
gcc:
./a.out 5.58s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 5.710 total
ghc:
It's important to switch from mod to rem. This can be done by a
simple abstract interpretation.
I'm nore sure if it's jhc or gcc that does this for jhc.
-- Lennart
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Rafael Cunha de Almeida
almeida...@gmail.com wrote:
John Meacham wrote:
Here are jhc's
Lennart Augustsson wrote:
It's important to switch from mod to rem. This can be done by a
simple abstract interpretation.
I'm nore sure if it's jhc or gcc that does this for jhc.
It's not just adding rem. Ghc still runs much slower using rem. It's
only when switching to -fvia-C and using
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 07:30:30PM -0300, Rafael Cunha de Almeida wrote:
John Meacham wrote:
Here are jhc's timings for the same programs on my machine. gcc and ghc
both used -O3 and jhc had its full standard optimizations turned on.
jhc:
./hs.out 5.12s user 0.07s system 96% cpu 5.380
On 27/03/2010, at 05:27, John Meacham wrote:
Here are jhc's timings for the same programs on my machine. gcc and ghc
both used -O3 and jhc had its full standard optimizations turned on.
jhc:
./hs.out 5.12s user 0.07s system 96% cpu 5.380 total
gcc:
./a.out 5.58s user 0.00s system 97%
On 28/03/2010, at 11:07, John Meacham wrote:
I have not thoroughly checked it, but I think there are a couple things
going on here:
It could also be worthwhile to float out (i*i + j*j) in rangeK instead of
computing it in every loop iteration. Neither ghc nor gcc can do this; if jhc
can then
On 28/03/2010, at 09:47, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
It's important to switch from mod to rem. This can be done by a
simple abstract interpretation.
Also, changing the definition of rem from
a `rem` b
| b == 0 = divZeroError
| a == minBound b == (-1) =
Here are jhc's timings for the same programs on my machine. gcc and ghc
both used -O3 and jhc had its full standard optimizations turned on.
jhc:
./hs.out 5.12s user 0.07s system 96% cpu 5.380 total
gcc:
./a.out 5.58s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 5.710 total
ghc:
./try 31.11s user 0.00s system
12 matches
Mail list logo
