On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 03:18:43PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote: > > > Starting with a reg compiler producing reg code and iterating > > a standard > > configure/make/make install with 6.0.1 gives these numbers on x86: > > > > 70m5.850s > > 86m27.550s > > 86m26.350s > > > > so it looks like this is about 25% slower, although I don't know how > > much it will vary by architecture. This isn't purely testing GHC of > > course, but I think it's probably pretty close. > > Interesting. Bear in mind that a lot of the time is spent in GCC, and
Ah, I hadn't thought about that, I had only considered the cases where gcc was explicitly used to compile C sources. > that is going to be roughly the same for registerised vs. > unregisterised, so overall compile times don't look much different. > However, I think you'll find that ordinary Haskell programs will vary by > about a factor of 2 in performance between registerised & unregisterised > (last time I checked was a few years ago, though). Looks like it hasn't changed then - MAG's testsuite with some of MAG's optimisations removed takes 5m55.710s vs 12m35.560s (compile times were 2m46.870s vs 3m18.610s). > What are the binary sizes like? magdcalc is 2730251 (reg) 7697141 (unreg) before stripping and 1375696 (reg) 4771196 (unreg) after. Ian _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
