poor man's benchmark :)
http://github.com/nfjinjing/bench-euler
multi core aware, use bench-euler +RTS -N2 where 2 means 2 cores, and
watch your cpu fries :)
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Andy Georges
andy.geor...@elis.ugent.be wrote:
Hi Simon et al,
I've picked up the
Hi Simon et al,
I've picked up the HaBench/nofib/nobench issue again, needing a decent set of
real applications to do some exploring of what people these days call
split-compilation. We have a framework that was able to explore GCC
optimisations [1] -- the downside there was the dependency of
| I think that we should have, as David Roundy pointed out, a
| restriction to code that is actually used frequently. However, I
| think we should make a distinction between micro-benchmarks, that
| test some specific item, and real-life benchmarks.
As many of you will know, the nofib benchmark
On 29/01/07, Simon Peyton-Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We found these categories to be useful and robust, and I think they'd be useful
for the new
suite. In particular, the imaginary suite is useless for (say) choosing a
compiler, but
fantastic for exposing particular weak spots. But if
Hi,
Following up and the threads on haskell and haskell-cafe, I'd like
to gather ideas, comments and suggestions for a standarized Haskell
Benchmark Suite.
The idea is to gather a bunch of programs written in Haskell, and
which are representative for the Haskell community (i.e. apps,
On Jan 28, 2007, at 8:51 AM, Andy Georges wrote:
it is nice to know that e.g., Data.ByteString performs as good as
C, but is would be even nicer to see that large, real-life apps can
reach that same performance.
What about using darcs as a benchmark? I heard people say it's slow.
The
Hi
What about using darcs as a benchmark? I heard people say it's slow.
The undercurrent is that it's slow because it's written in Haskell.
Its slow because some algorithms are O(stupid value). Some operations
(I've been told) would take 100's of years to terminate. That has
nothing to do
On 28 Jan 2007, at 12:57, Joel Reymont wrote:
On Jan 28, 2007, at 8:51 AM, Andy Georges wrote:
it is nice to know that e.g., Data.ByteString performs as good as
C, but is would be even nicer to see that large, real-life apps
can reach that same performance.
What about using darcs as a
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 10:36:50PM +0100, Andy Georges wrote:
On 28 Jan 2007, at 12:57, Joel Reymont wrote:
On Jan 28, 2007, at 8:51 AM, Andy Georges wrote:
it is nice to know that e.g., Data.ByteString performs as good as
C, but is would be even nicer to see that large, real-life apps
| Following up and the threads on haskell and haskell-cafe, I'd like to
| gather ideas, comments and suggestions for a standarized Haskell
| Benchmark Suite.
Great idea. Maybe this can subsume nofib. I recommend reading the nofib paper
though:
10 matches
Mail list logo
