On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Because Parsec-3 apparently still has some speed regressions compared
> to Parsec-2 (I'm not qualified to note whether its design is slow or
> if you have to use it differently to get good performance out of it),
> so many developers prefer to stick to Parsec-2 for this reason.

I thought Parsec 3.1 had pretty much caught up with the performance of parsec 2?
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Reply via email to