Hi, Am Montag, den 12.12.2011, 15:37 -0500 schrieb wren ng thornton: > I've noticed that take and filter are good producers (and consumers) for > list fusion, but takeWhile, drop, and dropWhile are not. Is there any > reason for this discrepancy? > > If not, would I need to go through the libraries@ process for fixing it, > or should I just submit a patch?
while preparing my guest lecture¹ about Haskell Performance recently I
also noticed that takeWhile (and concatMap!) are not setup for list
fusion, here is what I showed the students; it improved performance
considerably in the testcase.
takeWhile' :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> [a]
takeWhile' p xs = build $ \c n -> foldr (takeWhileF p c n) n xs
{-# INLINE takeWhile' #-}
takeWhileF p c n x xs = if p x then x `c` xs else n
Of course, for a proper inclusion one first has to find out if
takeWhile' is sufficiently fast even when not fused, or whether one has
to do the „replace first, try to fuse, and then try to replace back by
original function if not fused“ tick that is used for, e.g., (++).
But yes, you are right that all these function ought to be fusable.
Greetings,
Joachim
¹
http://www.joachim-breitner.de/blog/archives/539-Guest-lecture-on-Haskell-performance.html
--
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
m...@joachim-breitner.de | nome...@debian.org | GPG: 0x4743206C
xmpp: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
