I took a closer look at some of the worst offenders, and in fact, when I use the old code generator, the difference in sizes is not all that great. So I suspect that I (or someone else) introduced an unrelated regression in the backend. I'll have some better stats soon...
Edward Excerpts from Edward Z. Yang's message of Thu Apr 07 11:37:05 -0400 2011: > I've been working on new optimization passes for Hoopl to get > the code back to the quality of the old code generator. > With the new optimization pass, the binaries in the test suite > are, on average, 7% larger than the old code generator. > > Here are the worst offenders, with T3294 clocking in with a whopping > 112% increase in size. > > %change oldsize delta filename > ----------------------------------------------------- > 0.3233 6224 2012 ./deSugar/should_compile/ds036.o > 0.3235 2068 669 ./ffi/should_compile/cc005.o > 0.3333 11616 3872 ./arrows/should_compile/arrowcase1.o > 0.3371 35228 11876 ./typecheck/should_compile/tc095.o > 0.3374 111300 37556 ./indexed-types/should_compile/T3787.o > 0.3394 2684 911 ./ffi/should_run/ffi002.o > 0.3443 2916 1004 ./simplCore/should_compile/simpl016.o > 0.3581 3664 1312 ./haddock/should_compile_flag_haddock/haddockA033.o > 0.4439 7948 3528 ./gadt/red-black.o > 0.4791 209128 100200 ./deSugar/should_run/dsrun023.o > 0.5381 1548 833 ./driver/B027/F.o > 0.5822 1520 885 ./driver/F016.o > 0.5822 1520 885 ./driver/F034.o > 0.5822 1520 885 ./driver/obj018/TestStub018.o > 0.5822 1520 885 ./driver/out019/TestStub019.o > 0.6001 1488 893 ./driver/B044/F.o > 0.6111 1476 902 ./ffi/should_compile/cc012.o > 0.7677 3512 2696 ./ffi/should_compile/cc013.o > 1.1209 700884 785632 ./perf/compiler/T3294.o > > I am planning on doing similar tests on nofib. > > Cheers, > Edward _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
