Roger Hui wrote: >> Can't help it, but here's an illustration in speed difference >> between Haskell GHCi (interpreted) and J on this subject. > > How does Haskell GHCi perform on things like summation, > maximum, sort, and indexing? e.g. For each of the following > arguments, > > i4=: 1e6 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2e4 > i9=: 1e6 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2e9 > d =: 1e6 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0 > > ts '+/ i4' > ts '>./ i4' > ts '/:~ i4' > ts 'i.~ i4' > ts '+/i6' > etc. First of all it's not my intention to promote Haskell by you J-ers! I'm as much interested in Haskell as in J. The speed difference is just an aspect in this matter that caught my attention!
But you asked for it, so here are some comparison's in advantage to J to reassure you (if necessary) : *Main> sum [1..1000000] 500000500000 (3.04 secs, 165391456 bytes) Here's what they call in Haskell a strict version of summing: *Main> foldl' (+) 0 [1..1000000] 500000500000 (0.36 secs, 112405920 bytes) Still a lot slower! Other actions are alike: much slower in interpreted Haskell. Hoping I didn't offend you too much caused by my naive way of putting things ;-) And no, you don't have to convince of the beauty and power of J. And finally if you people don't want this kind of fuzz on your forum please don't hesitate tell me! @@i=Arie ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
