On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:16:36 -0700, John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > n Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 12:22:13PM +0100, Malcolm Wallace wrote: > > So is it fair to compare the default lazy Haskell solution with all > > the eager solutions out there that laboriously do all this unnecessary > > work? Apparently not, so we have gone to all kinds of trouble to slow > > the Haskell solution down, make it over-strict, do the work N times, > > and thereby have a "fair" performance test. Huh. > > I think the naive way is perfectly fair. If haskell has to live with > the disadvantages of lazy evaluation, it only makes sense we should be > able to take advantage of the advantages. The fact that haskell doesn't > have to compute those intermediate values is a real advantage which > should be reflected in the results IMHO. > John
This seems especially true if you have to add extra lines of code to make the tests "fair," because this extra code counts against Haskell in the lines-of-code metric. Personally, I am more impressed by the lines-of-code metrics than I am by the performance metrics. - Brian _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
