Thanks Simon. Parallel 2.2.0.1 was straight forward. I just replaced rnf
with rdeepseq and my original use of parMap worked like a charm giving
twice the performance for my dual-core system as I original expected and
now find.
Thanks,
- Marcus
Marcus D. Gabriel wrote:
> Thank you Simon, I will
Thank you Simon, I will obtain parallel 2.2.0.1 and work with it.
Actually, the reason I asked my question was because I did not
think forceParList should yield better performance than parList
(unless it was becasue of the foldl?).
I read the release notes for 6.12.1 about the work done on the ghc
On 18/12/2009 18:31, Marcus D. Gabriel wrote:
Hello,
In Control.Parallel.Strategies, parList is defined as
parList strat [] = ()
parList strat (x:xs) = strat x `par` (parList strat xs)
with
parMap strat f xs = map f xs `using` parList strat.
I have recently found that if I
Well, I finally put in place 6.12.1 and read the documentation for
Control.Parallel.Strategies. All of my code for the application described
below uses Done, demanding, sparking, (>|), and (>||) which are deprecated
and which is what I used. Additionally, I need to understand Eval first
to change
Denis Bueno wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 11:31, Marcus D. Gabriel wrote:
>> than parList via parMap. For example, in one experiment, parMap
>> with parList run at 0.81 the time of the serial solution whereas
>> forceParMap with forceParList run at 0.58 the time of the serial
>> solution. Thi
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 11:31, Marcus D. Gabriel wrote:
> than parList via parMap. For example, in one experiment, parMap
> with parList run at 0.81 the time of the serial solution whereas
> forceParMap with forceParList run at 0.58 the time of the serial
> solution. This is to say, forceParList
Hello,
In Control.Parallel.Strategies, parList is defined as
parList strat [] = ()
parList strat (x:xs) = strat x `par` (parList strat xs)
with
parMap strat f xs = map f xs `using` parList strat.
I have recently found that if I define
forceParMap strat f xs = map f xs `usi
