Send Beginners mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Beginners digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: coming to grips with hackage (Heinrich Apfelmus)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2014 10:52:31 +0100
From: Heinrich Apfelmus <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] coming to grips with hackage
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Brandon Allbery wrote:
> I do find myself wondering if anyone has checked to see how important the
> inlining is these days; perhaps ghc's general performance (and a hat tip to
> Moore's law) has made it possible to consider compiling more stable
> libraries.
Lately, I have been looking at GHC Core output for unrelated reasons,
and it appears to me that cross-module inlining is essential to GHC
performance.
For instance, if you don't inline the monadic combinators (>>=) and
`return` for the IO monad and perform even more inlining afterwards,
performance can easily differ by an order of magnitude. The reason is
that the second argument of (>>=) is a closure. Closure creation is very
expensive compared to the sequence of primops you get after inlining.
Best regards,
Heinrich Apfelmus
--
http://apfelmus.nfshost.com
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
------------------------------
End of Beginners Digest, Vol 68, Issue 6
****************************************
