Thanks for the answers Bulat and Andrzej,
so it seems that I was a little to naive, I think that I have
understood what Andrzej wanted to say,
but I still don't buy it all.
With google I could find only something on Algebraic Dynamic
Programming (links to the others?), there they went from an embedded
haskell implementation to a direct compiler implementation.
From what I understood I believe that mis-performance in that case
came from the embedded nature of the DSL
1) not having a specialized parsing step (making the usage more
difficult)
2) no abstract representation of the program that could be optimized
with special transformations relative to the DSL
3) not fully optimized kernel methods
writing a real compiler for that language made sense, and also the
choice of c as language for it, but I think that it would have been
possible to write it in haskell without a big performance hit. I
haven't seen that haskell compiler significantly worse than others
except in really low level computational code, which (with more
effort than with C) can be optimized so that it is not really so
terribly worse.
Sincerely
Fawzi
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
